PDA

View Full Version : Scarlet Announcement



Pages : [1] 2

Max Smith
11-30-2009, 05:40 PM
I wonder how Red's new Scarlet fixed lens announcement will effect pricing and specs in the rest of the prosumer market.

Duke M.
11-30-2009, 06:28 PM
Since it's only an announcement of when it could be out (subject to change) I doubt if there will be any immediate impact. They have already announce another 30 day delay.

Max Smith
11-30-2009, 06:38 PM
True. And don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those RED-or-die nutcases, but I'm guessing if they're making an announcement they must have most of the tech irorned out.

If they do deliver in June, or even a few months later, it might well shake up the prosumer market. Or maybe not, time will tell.

Barry_Green
11-30-2009, 06:42 PM
I would be surprised if it changed anything. This is the third time Red's made announcements on Scarlet, and announced shipping dates in the future. Why should the other companies change?

Now, when Red actually ships the product, and it actually starts to impact the other guys' sales, then that's when you'll see the other companies responding with either new products or price cuts or ... well, whatever they think they would need to do, at that point, to stay competitive.

dadoboy
11-30-2009, 06:57 PM
Yeah, but maybe 3rd times the charm. This time, they have actual photos. So a picture being worth a whole lot of renders and words, might mean something to Japan, Inc.

I'm not holding my breath though, I doubt we can put money down for one until late summer 2010.

ChipG
11-30-2009, 07:07 PM
I read the announment with little enthusiasm, guess I'm tired / burned out from all the hype.

I'm waiting to see lots of footage / tests before I get excited again. Jarred just posted a pic of the Scarlet next to a Nikon D3 for a scale size comparison, It seemed to get my attenton more than any other Scarlet pic or 'render' so far.

I'm really tired of big cameras with big prices if you can't tell :)

David G. Smith
11-30-2009, 07:22 PM
I would be surprised if it changed anything. This is the third time Red's made announcements on Scarlet, and announced shipping dates in the future. Why should the other companies change?

Now, when Red actually ships the product, and it actually starts to impact the other guys' sales, then that's when you'll see the other companies responding with either new products or price cuts or ... well, whatever they think they would need to do, at that point, to stay competitive.

Yeah, I doubt if the "Other guys" are waiting around for Red to do anything. I think we are going to see some outstanding products from all the big players in the very short term. However, if there is only one thing I have learned from you Barry (Which is absolutely not the case) it is that the video camera market is diverse enough for many, many end users and for many, many products from all the camera manufactures.

That being said, I gotta give Red their props... they are making thing interesting.

Jason Ramsey
11-30-2009, 07:23 PM
I'm digging the mini-primes. interested to see how those perform. fast glass, and affordably priced, imo.

Also, was nice to see some of the modules come down in price... the 5" touch LCD went down 300 bucks. the 2.8" went down 100.

ChipG
11-30-2009, 07:40 PM
Yea, 6mm & 8mm mini primes for $950 looked interesting, I just need to see how good the glass is before I get excited again.

William_Robinette
11-30-2009, 07:58 PM
I'll tell you. I was one of the first thirty people in line on the first day of NAB 2008 when the scarlet was first introduced. I have been following (ever more distant) RED's progress as have many of have here, and with this latest announcement I started to wonder if the pursuit of making obsolescence obsolete isn't a self defeating goal. I mean, I want the perfect camera. But I would like a camera with a few less features then one with everything I want I can only hold in my dreams.

I feel weird saying this, because I have always been of the opinion of shoot now, buy later. Let RED do their thing and it'll be ready when it is. I still believe in that, but I wonder... really, are they ever going to make the perfect camera? No. They won't. But where do you draw the line of "good enough?"

Jason Ramsey
11-30-2009, 08:22 PM
But where do you draw the line of "good enough?"

Whatever effectively enough serves your individual purposes and/or needs.

Later,
Jason

Max Smith
11-30-2009, 11:23 PM
For me the issue is being able to shoot 3k and 120p (with everything else mentioned) for less than the price of an EX1 and quite a bit less than an EX3 or HPX300. Not to mention the PMW 350 with is a 2/3 chip.

For instance, what does Sony do with it's newly announced NXCAM series?

And for the record I've been firmly on the 'I'll believe it when I see it' bandwagon with RED.

I just think there is a decent probability that camera debuts this year and if so it will alter the prosumer market considerably. And while I partially agree with Barry that the big boys won't change until their bottom line is affected, they've got to be taking this into consideration in terms of their own development cycles.

Barry_Green
11-30-2009, 11:38 PM
And while I partially agree with Barry that the big boys won't change until their bottom line is affected, they've got to be taking this into consideration in terms of their own development cycles.
Anything that would come out in competition with Scarlet, was probably set in motion the day Scarlet was first announced, back about 19 months ago. It takes a long time to bring a camera to fruition. Everyone talks about how "quickly" Red can move, because they're a small company, but ... Scarlet will be at least two, two and a half years from first announcement to first product being delivered.

The EX1 successor was probably started on before the EX1 even shipped. The HPX170 was probably being worked on before the HVX200 shipped.

As far as PRODUCT goes, I don't think they could respond quickly, if they haven't already been working on it.

I was referring to pricing -- I can't imagine why they'd drop their prices a penny based on an announcement of a product that's a minimum of six months away. They'll react to actual changes in the marketplace, yes. But not just because someone announced something, and (with all due respect) certainly not because Red announced something (because Red has made a very clear case that their announcements are subject to drastic change).

Now, if all the customers in the marketplace just stopped buying today's products, whether due to the announcement or job losses or recession or whatever reason, I believe THAT they would react to. They would do like any business would -- offer incentives, rebates, discounts, promotions, whatever it took to stimulate sales again.

Max Smith
12-01-2009, 12:00 AM
I buy that.

killacam
12-01-2009, 12:21 AM
this is more in response to the other scarlet thread that got closed, but in terms of dslr's vs. the scarlet and whether the scarlet has lost a lot of its potential user base to the dslr's, I think honestly it has, but there are still a lot of people that are more comfortable with traditional camcorders and weren't ready to trust the video dslr's due to their limitations that will probably go for the scarlet now. it will probably take a lot of the market away from the mid-to-high end camcorder market than it will lose probably. I don't think there are really any sub-$10,000 2/3" cameras out there right now.

as far as why you would go with a scarlet over a dslr, there are obvious advantages like in filming any type of action due to rolling shutter; also for greenscreening, the 4:2:2 color space and lack of aliasing will definitely make it better suited. I see the dslr's as more complementary actually, better for static (or dolly) shots where you would want the shallow dof. but people have been talking about how they're willing to shell out 1-2k for an uncompressed hdmi card or box, and if you couple that with a shoulder rig and maybe the foundry's $500 rolling shutter plug-in you're already pretty much at a similar price point if you add all those to a 7d/gh1/5d. you don't get quite the low light capability (I think the difference is supposed to be around 2.5 stops) but people have been able to achieve pretty shallow dof with 2/3" sensors before. I like them both though.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 12:22 AM
For me the issue is being able to shoot 3k and 120p .

Red "3K" "4K" is not what it seems. It is a Bayer pattern sensor - so 3K works out to about a 1080p class resolution. I shot a number of commercials with a friends Red One at 3K. At full 3k rez, very, very soft. At 1080p, it looked very good - like a smooth EX1.

The only significant advantages of the 2/3" Scarlet is a slightly larger sensor (somewhat mitigated by Bayer), 120fps and RAW codec. However, it's lens appears to be much less feature wise and usability than EX1, HVX etc. as well as onboard audio, bundled IO etc.

Plus, workflow is still problematic. And we know nothing of build quality, reliability, and stability. And very little of IQ especially artifacts and issues.

I found the whole announcement at this late date underwhelming. I think Red as missed the boat on the sub $10k market. Unless everyone else stand stills for the next 9 month and Scarlet ends up being perfect, they are risking slipping into nichedom and very limited appeal.

killacam
12-01-2009, 12:32 AM
honestly I admit I jumped the gun and got a dslr because I kind of couldn't wait around for more news about the scarlet anymore- and I really like them, but if money weren't an object I would still get a 2/3" (or an s35 I suppose if we're talking hypothetically) scarlet as soon as it came out.

we still have to see footage though.

killacam
12-01-2009, 12:49 AM
The only significant advantages of the 2/3" Scarlet is a slightly larger sensor (somewhat mitigated by Bayer), 120fps and RAW codec. However, it's lens appears to be much less feature wise and usability than EX1, HVX etc. as well as onboard audio, bundled IO etc.

Plus, workflow is still problematic. And we know nothing of build quality, reliability, and stability. And very little of IQ especially artifacts and issues.

I found the whole announcement at this late date underwhelming. I think Red as missed the boat on the sub $10k market. Unless everyone else stand stills for the next 9 month and Scarlet ends up being perfect, they are risking slipping into nichedom and very limited appeal.

I dunno, I know there are still a lot of questions left about it, but I can't see why anyone would choose an hvx or ex1 over one now. I don't get what you mean about the lenses though since the mini primes seem really nice and even the fixed lens seems to be pretty advanced? as far as audio, I know it has no onboard microphone but I thought one of the features was "Two independent microphone level channels, balanced input circuits, 48V Phantom Power, digitized at 24-bit 48KHz". I know the extra I/O modules have extra XLR inputs along with some other stuff but I didn't think you'd need the modules except for advanced or special cases.

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 12:51 AM
RHowever, it's lens appears to be much less feature wise and usability than EX1, HVX etc. as well as onboard audio, bundled IO etc.

What are you basing that on exactly?
From what I've seen so far the specs on the 2/3" fixed scarlet lens seem pretty sweet.
But regardless, it's kidn of hard to judge seeing as it hasn't been released yet.

And I"m not sure what you mean by onboard audio and bundled IO - seeing as we haven't seen much detail on those specs yet.

EDITED TO ADD:
Looks like Killacam posted while I was typing.
:)

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 12:55 AM
I dunno, I know there are still a lot of questions left about it, but I can't see why anyone would choose an hvx or ex1 over one now.

Well - I can see one huge reason why someone would choose and HVX or EX1 over a Scarlet now.
:)

There's still quite a bit of time before anything is released.
If someone is working for a living, a camera like an HVX or EX1 bought today will have paid for itself WAY before Scarlet is released.

ChipG
12-01-2009, 01:04 AM
I can see lots of reasons why people would still buy an hpx170 or ex1 over the fixed lens scarlet. I think scarlets form factor will come into play for fast hand held run n' gun work. Yes, I know you can buy all sorts of handles and mounts for it but then it's not a little hand held run n' gun cam anymore (from what I can tell at this stage).

I do like the size of it next to the nikon d3 but how will it feel to hold a little square box all day?

EDIT: I'd love to see scarlet's guts inside of an hpx170 body. That's what I'm talkin' bout!

adkimery
12-01-2009, 01:08 AM
For me the issue is being able to shoot 3k and 120p (with everything else mentioned) for less than the price of an EX1 and quite a bit less than an EX3 or HPX300. Not to mention the PMW 350 with is a 2/3 chip.


To be completely fair $4750 for the fixed Scarlet gets you a very bare bones setup in almost the same way $1750 only gets you a Red One body. Typical camcorders come out of the box ready to go for the most part. The Scarlet does not. EVF? Comes separate. Handles? Come separate. I/O jacks (HD-SDI, TC, etc.,)? Come separate. It won't take much to 'build up' a Scarlet that is closer to $10k than $5k. On paper is that still a competitive price? IMO yes, but it's a far cry from $4750 which gets you started but not really a production ready piece of gear.



-A

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 01:08 AM
What are you basing that on exactly?
From what I've seen so far the specs on the 2/3" fixed scarlet lens seem pretty sweet.
:)

EX1 has F 1.9 14X lens with AF/MF with MF switch and OIS, built in lens correction in camera etc.

Built in mics, EVF and LCD etc. - more IO out of box etc. Lots of cams have 4 channel audio etc.

Again, the only compelling Scarlet advantages are 120fps and RAW. The "system" modularity is unknown how well it will work and cost-effective it will be.

And a second generation GH1 or 7D (let's say with an aliasing/rez fix and better codec) at 1/3rd or less the cost make Scarlet 2/3" fixed or interchangeable a camera with a small audience.

The primes are sweet but $5k worth of 2/3" primes seems like a sketchy investment in a S35 sensor world. Can't use them on much else but a Scarlet.

Barring some major change in price or features or total lack of video DSLR advances in the next 9 months, I don't huge waiting lines for Scarlets.

And unless the S35 Scarlet comes soon (and it's well over $10k for very basic kit), man, would I really want it over a Mark V or 7ds or whatever is out then? That money buys a lot of other stuff. I can always rent a cam for super slo-mo.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 01:13 AM
I dunno, I know there are still a lot of questions left about it, but I can't see why anyone would choose an hvx or ex1 over one now.

Uh, second generation of those are shipping now. And even when Scarlet's are shipping, if they ship with problems etc. anything like Red One, plenty of people will skip them. Broadcast/ENG/EFP/Event guys (a huge market) also will likely skip no matter what.

Plus, A 2/3" with primes will cost as much as 2 EX1 or HVX-class cam. Plus, if Red slips another 3 to 6 months, all sorts of other cams will be shipping in the mix.

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 01:20 AM
EX1 has F 1.9 14X lens with AF/MF with MF switch and OIS, built in lens correction in camera etc.

The fixed scarlet lens is T2.6
8X (versus the 14X, so you may ahve a point there)

AF & MF, not sure on OIS - but it won't surprise me to see it have some form of OIS, it definitely hasn't been ruled out as far as I know.



Built in mics, EVF and LCD etc. - more IO out of box etc. Lots of cams have 4 channel audio etc.

The whole point of the system is modularity - so no, those things may not all be packaged into the body, but they are all possibilities.
Comparing a modular system to an enclosed one is kind of apples and oranges in many ways.

Is modularity for everyone? Of course not - but it's definitely an interesting option.
A lot can definitely change in the coming year, but I'll be pretty surprised if the Scarlet doesn't sell like hot cakes.
Then again, i could be way off - who knows.

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 01:22 AM
that f1.9 isn't fixed throughout the zoom range is it?

There are lots of advantages (to me) that make it well worth the price. I'm not really into the whole debating thing too much over it though. Lots and lots of choices for folks out there and that will be out there down the line, that can work in more than one arena, and are effectively suited for multiple tasks.

Without going into debate, I'll just have to respectfully disagree with you that there aren't going to be a lot of folks interested in the 2/3" models. I've seen quite a few who are very interested and they are coming from all different areas. Everyone has their own needs/wants.

I think the differences will become more apparent to some folks as time goes on and these things finally make it into hands.

I can think of ex and hvx users who are seriously looking at a scarlet. I can think of gh1 and 7d users who are as well. I can also think of 7d users who came from a hv20 and are happy and content, and hpx users who are more than happy with what that camera can do for their needs and don't need/want a scarlet or some other camera.. And, folks who use several of the above mentioned for different tasks.

anyways...

To each his own.

Later,
jason

killacam
12-01-2009, 01:31 AM
Well - I can see one huge reason why someone would choose and HVX or EX1 over a Scarlet now.
:)

There's still quite a bit of time before anything is released.
If someone is working for a living, a camera like an HVX or EX1 bought today will have paid for itself WAY before Scarlet is released.

well yeah, sorry I guess I meant when it comes out ha.

adkimery
12-01-2009, 01:32 AM
T
The whole point of the system is modularity - so no, those things may not all be packaged into the body, but they are all possibilities.
Comparing a modular system to an enclosed one is kind of apples and oranges in many ways.
Of course those things will be possible w/purchasing additional modules, but then you don't have a $4750 camera anymore and that strikes at the heart of people saying, "How can Sony and Panasonic hope to stay in business when Red delivers so much more camera for so much less money?" Basically Sony and Panasonic sell you a 'complete' camera out of the box and Red sells you a starting point. People thinking that $4750 will get them a camera w/all the features and functions they've come to expect from nice prosumer cameras will be in for a rude awakening.

I don't think either way is inherently better than the other as I'm a firm believer in the horses for courses mentality, but, as you said, comparing an out-of-the-box Scarlet to an out-of-the-box EX3 is a bit like apples to oranges.


-Andrew

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 01:33 AM
To be completely fair $4750 for the fixed Scarlet gets you a very bare bones setup in almost the same way $1750 only gets you a Red One body. Typical camcorders come out of the box ready to go for the most part. The Scarlet does not. EVF? Comes separate. Handles? Come separate. I/O jacks (HD-SDI, TC, etc.,)? Come separate. It won't take much to 'build up' a Scarlet that is closer to $10k than $5k. On paper is that still a competitive price? IMO yes, but it's a far cry from $4750 which gets you started but not really a production ready piece of gear.



-A

I think this is a bit misleading. You say evf as if it has no viewing at all...

4750 gets you a 2.8" touch screen lcd, a wireless REDmote, a Side CF module, a travel charger, a battery, and an as of yet unknown way/module for using that battery. That's pretty much everything that you would get in most any other consumer camera purchase at, above, and under the price range.

Like Luis said, modularity aint' for everyone... but, it is certainly more than possible to get a working setup for 4750 plus the cost of recording media and any 3rd party support system that you deem appropriate for your needs should you want to go that route.

later,
jason

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 01:38 AM
I don't think either way is inherently better than the other as I'm a firm believer in the horses for courses mentality, but, as you said, comparing an out-of-the-box Scarlet to an out-of-the-box EX3 is a bit like apples to oranges

Gotcha - and I agree for the most part with that last point, looks like we were in some ways saying the same thing, from different perspectives.

In the end each system/choice has it's advantages and disadvantages.
Thing is - all depends on the specific users needs which things count as advantage or disadvantages.
:thumbsup:

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 01:41 AM
Gotcha - and I agree for the most part with that last point, looks like we were in some ways saying the same thing, from different perspectives.

In the end each system/choice has it's advantages and disadvantages.
Thing is - all depends on the specific users needs which things count as advantage or disadvantages.
:thumbsup:

agree 100%... people are quick to judge sometimes based on their own emotions/needs/wants, whatever.

I don't knock the 7d b/c it's not the right camera for me. In fact, it's a great little camera, and I'd love to shoot with it some... but, it's just not my cup of tea. Doesn't make it a bad camera for someone else :)

later,
jason

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 01:45 AM
was considering buying a scarlet ..

now i doubt it .. things that make scarlet suck

1. its a box..looks uncomfortable to hold
2. modular ..is it great or is it just expensive ..once you start adding things the price shoots up to the moon

anybody want to add up the price of a good kit ? i figured 13000 to 15000

3. work flow.. you better have a super computer with massive RAM and maybe even a red rocket that cost another 5k or so
and a lot of time to invest to figure out red cine x and the rest of the cryptic red code

4. change ...it's cool sometimes but after a while it starts to get to be a muddy mess

5. those mini primes... i have my doubts

6. No announcement means anything because Everything is subject to change

7. people are comparing the 7d(or is it 5d.. ahh who cares) to the One / Scarlet ..but its 2000 to 17500 / 4750+

The pros

about a million and we know them all already

I don't hate scarlet/red and I may buy one but now I am definitely looking at other brands. not a fanboy.

LOL flame me see if I care. Use to it.

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 01:56 AM
not gonna flame you, but at least you can take the attitude out of your posts. that's not asking all that much.

13-15k is going to be a pretty dang decked out kit for sure.

I did just get a pretty good system for about 3 grand with a lot of bells and whistles.... I'm handling 4k R3D's quite nicely in both REDCINEX and a trial of Vegas 9.0c with it. So, not as outrageously supercomputer as you make it sound, but yes... it's demanding stuff... that's not anything new though. In fact, it's just gotten better with time, now that there is pretty broad support in several NLE's and computers get faster and cheaper all the time.

7. People get into comparing stuff too much in my opinion. They want their 7d to be a red, or their hv20 to be an ex1, or whatver... I try not to get too wrapped up in all the camera comparisons beyond, what are the features, what do they do and will it work for me... Though, it can be fun sometimes, I ain't gonna lie :)

Later,
jason

adkimery
12-01-2009, 02:19 AM
I think this is a bit misleading. You say evf as if it has no viewing at all...

4750 gets you a 2.8" touch screen lcd, a wireless REDmote, a Side CF module, a travel charger, a battery, and an as of yet unknown way/module for using that battery. That's pretty much everything that you would get in most any other consumer camera purchase at, above, and under the price range.

I'm not meaning to imply that there is no viewing at all, but LCD's aren't the best options for all locations which is why prosumer cameras (where the fixed Scarlet's price falls) have both an LCD and an EVF. Prosumer cameras also tend to come out of the box w/a way to hold the camera (the Scarlet is basically a box w/no handles or grips), a way to mount the camera on a tripod, a way to send signals in/out, etc.,. Red sells you a starting point so you can add what you need and skip what you don't while Sony/Panny sells you a 'complete', non-upgradeable unit.

Again, this is not a dig at Red as they are just offering up a different way to skin the cat. I'm just trying to dispel the idea that $4750 for a Scarlet will get you everything the EX1 or HVX200 has 'plus more' because that's just not true. If you want to match feature for feature as best you can the Scarlet will turn out to be the more expensive camera. That stands to reason though because the 3k, 2/3" sensor, frame rates, compression used, etc., will put Scarlet on top in terms of specs.


-A

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 02:40 AM
I see where you are coming from. I just think it's more than a "starting point" :)

I think a good substitution for the absolutely budget-minded potential purchaser would be to forgo the redmote and get the side handle instead. You get most of the same functions out of it for 200-400 more than the redmote, plus it'll hold a battery. And, you get a bit of ergonomics out of it. At least a budget-minded version of them more along the lines of a dslr setup... lcd and side handle kinda setup.

But, make no mistake... these are primarily cinema oriented camera's, so it stands to reason that they aren't housed in a traditional camcorder form-factor. Plus, the "modular" building blocks system doesn't really lend itself to that.. at least not at the starting gate. You gotta build the form factor you want. Certainly not going to work for some folks. I'm personally into the idea of needing a compact "dslr" type form factor one day, and a full-on shoulder mount rig with all the ins and outs, infinite record and battery time (via hot-swapping of both) another... That's attractive to me. Though, it doesn't mean it has to be attractive to everyone else :)


If you want to match feature for feature as best you can the Scarlet will turn out to be the more expensive camera. That stands to reason though because the 3k, 2/3" sensor, frame rates, compression used, etc., will put Scarlet on top in terms of specs.

Absolutely. and I agree 100% Rightly so, it should cost more.

Just like any other camera, some things you will get more of or better of, others not so much. So for the folks used to a particular form factor, that 4750 isn't going to get them there. Always compromises, and we're still a long way off from that mythical "perfect camera" for everyone...

But, what I'm looking for (just me) at the top of my priority list before sensor size and form factor, etc. is as close as I can get to a no-compromise image in terms of robustness and all-around quality that I can get with as wide a range of framerate options, at a reasonable price (in context) <insert your own definition of reasonable here>. This is looking very attractive to me from what I've seen, heard and been whispered to so far. That's b/c that's what is at the top of my list in terms of importance. Is it going to do everything I want? No. But, will it do the things that are most important to me very well? We'll have to wait and see when they get here, but so far... all signs point to yes.

I'm just pretty amazed that a few years ago it was HVX and EX1 and the like. Now it's 1500 dollar DSLR cine DOF, and 40,000 dollar Arri digital cams, and 5,000 dollar 3k RAW machines, and RED One, and 7,000 dollar 5k Cine Brains, etc, etc. There is just such a wide range of products out there and on the horizon that all do amazing jobs for their chosen users at their price points.

ChipG
12-01-2009, 03:56 AM
Scarlet 3K will be out in 6ish months, it'll probably be another 2-3 months after that (providing there are no more delays) before anyone can get one because the Red guys have the option of buying the first ones so I'd bet by then (9ish months) a $2k computer will be fine for 3k footage. I think it's a fair amount to budget for a PC.

$8k-$10k would be the min amount IMO for a 3k fixed lens scarlet package including computer, that's just a few minimum options, extra battery and $2k for a computer. I don't think I'd have to invest in anymore software, I cut on Avid and do know it edits 4K Red.

So there is no screw hole in the bottom of a scarlet to mount it on a tripod? That doesn't sound right. Surely it has a 3/8 inch screw hole on the bottom?

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 08:35 AM
People keep talking about "3K' with Scarlet. It's not a 3k camera compared to other cameras and this number is only useful internally within Red - it's very misleading to use this term relevant to other cameras.

All Red sensors are Bayer patterns and you lose resolution on debayering. Scarlet is 1080p class camera. 3K Scarlet footage should look wonderful at 1080p or 2k. But if you projected at 3K, it would be quite soft.

The Red One is a 3K camera when used in it's "4k" mode.

nitsel
12-01-2009, 08:45 AM
Isn't it great to have choice? imagine a world with only one brand of camera or just microsoft os.. yak!
lol no offence to microsoft.

William_Robinette
12-01-2009, 09:12 AM
1. its a box..looks uncomfortable to hold

Yes, but until you hold it how can you be sure of the way it handles? You are making assumptions based on a picture.


2. modular ..is it great or is it just expensive ..once you start adding things the price shoots up to the moon

anybody want to add up the price of a good kit ? i figured 13000 to 15000

What is a good kit? 3K to CF cards with 24/48k dual channel audio + power, control, and monitoring seems solid to me


3. work flow.. you better have a super computer with massive RAM and maybe even a red rocket that cost another 5k or so
and a lot of time to invest to figure out red cine x and the rest of the cryptic red code

Have you ever posted R3D's? I have. It's easy. It was easy 12 months ago, and we are still 6 months out.


4. change ...it's cool sometimes but after a while it starts to get to be a muddy mess

Are you suggesting camera makers stay still so as to not disturb the waters?



5. those mini primes... i have my doubts

Remains to be seen, but Jarred said himself they were fantastic glass. Do you think he would make statements like that if they weren't?


6. No announcement means anything because Everything is subject to change

Very true.


7. people are comparing the 7d(or is it 5d.. ahh who cares) to the One / Scarlet ..but its 2000 to 17500 / 4750+

Again, true. But you can understand why.

Have you used RED? It has it's problems for sure, but if you learn it like any other camera system I think one finds it is really not any harder. It is just different.


People keep talking about "3K' with Scarlet. It's not a 3k camera compared to other cameras and this number is only useful internally within Red - it's very misleading to use this term relevant to other cameras.

All Red sensors are Bayer patterns and you lose resolution on debayering. Scarlet is 1080p class camera. 3K Scarlet footage should look wonderful at 1080p or 2k. But if you projected at 3K, it would be quite soft.

The Red One is a 3K camera when used in it's "4k" mode.

RED One is 3.2K in 4K mode, and they have now released a 4.5K mode. Until you have seen 3K from scarlet projected I don't think you can really say if it is soft or not. And show me any 1080p camera that is resolving all that is stated. If it is I would bet you the aliasing would make it unusable.

Chamber005
12-01-2009, 09:41 AM
One of the coolest things I've read is about remote focus pulling. That's just so awesome I can't even handle it...

I think the Scarlet is invaluable in that it screws with the competition. I still see people trying to sell their EX1s at close to full price because there just isn't anything that can compete with them. If the interchangeable Scarlet forces down the prices of the used EX3s and thus hurts the price of the EX1, that alone is enough to get excited about.

And I don't really agree with people here saying that the 2/3" is only a "complete" camera if you spend 10-15K. The body is under 3K. A couple of lenses and a few extras, at most you're looking at 6K -- still under the mark of an EX3.

In the end it's going to be about people like Phillip Bloom and some senior members here posting their take on this camera as it compares to the competition. I would be shocked if it doesn't blow all of the prosumer grade guys out of the water. And for the people who haven't jumped into the DSLR game, they probably never will once this cam is released (again, thus further driving down the price of used DSLRs). I fully expect many more firmware upgrades from a company like Red than I do from Canon, Nikon, etc -- those companies are worried about the next new camera. Red seems to be more concerned about building and selling the BEST camera they can and simply improving upon the existing model.

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 09:56 AM
To me it's simple. If you like the way your EX1 looks for $6000 then you'll love the way your Scarlet looks for $6000.

Not everyone needs 35mm DOF and most of us coming from 1/3" or 1/2" chips will greatly appreciate the added DOF of 2/3" without having to bend over backwards with focus. In all aspects that don't have anything to do with 35mm DOF, the Scarlet should best the DSLR's and probably most dedicated video cameras.

adkimery
12-01-2009, 10:10 AM
People keep talking about "3K' with Scarlet. It's not a 3k camera compared to other cameras and this number is only useful internally within Red - it's very misleading to use this term relevant to other cameras.
To be fair you could same thing about any camera. As I understand it because of the OLPF needed to reduce aliasing a native 1920x1080 camera, for example, won't be able to resolve 1920x1080 worth of detail. To get that amount of detail a lager-than-HD imager must be used and sampled down to 1929x1080. Of course there are also cameras and formats that aren't even full faster yet we still call them "HD" even though the images they record will never contain 1280x720 or 1920x1080 'pixels worth' of information.

I don't think calling the RED a 4k camera or the Scarlet a 3k camera is any more misleading than calling the HVX200 an HD camera (even though it can only resolve 540 lines from what I've read). I do think a distinction should be made between sensor size and actual resolved detail but that distinction is useful for all cameras, not just those from Red.


-A

William_Robinette
12-01-2009, 10:10 AM
In the end it's going to be about people like Phillip Bloom and some senior members here posting their take on this camera as it compares to the competition.

In the end it should be how this camera compares to other systems for your use. If it fits your needs, who cares what anyone else thinks. If it doesn't fit your needs, who cares what anyone else thinks.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 10:12 AM
RED One is 3.2K in 4K mode, and they have now released a 4.5K mode. Until you have seen 3K from scarlet projected I don't think you can really say if it is soft or not. And show me any 1080p camera that is resolving all that is stated. If it is I would bet you the aliasing would make it unusable.

It's 3.2k at best under ideal conditions at 4k. If focus is even slightly off, motion blur etc. it' can be well under 3k. There is no reason to believe Scarlet debayer will be any better.

EX1 resolve 1000 lines or so. Of course, resolution is not everything. But my point here is Scarlet is not a 3K camera and people need to stop calling it that unless they are trying to differentiate the various mode internally to Red models.

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 10:32 AM
3K Scarlet footage should look wonderful at 1080p or 2k. But if you projected at 3K, it would be quite soft.
I agree with almost everything stephenvv is saying in this thread, but I wanted to examine this a bit further... 3K from the Scarlet is always going to look sharper than 2K or 1080p. Projected 3K will look sharper than 2K projected on the same screen.

If you took a Red One and shot at 4K, and posted at 3K, then yes, the Red One's 4K should be substantially, significantly sharper than the Scarlet's 3K.

But if you shot on the very best 1080p camera out there, the Scarlet's 3K should still be sharper.

It won't be 50% sharper (like the difference between 2 and 3 might make you think it should be). It may only be 10% sharper. But it should still hold an advantage in sharpness. (well, in resolution, at least; "sharpness" is a more subjective term).

Anyway -- I don't think anyone is saying the 3K mode is "bad", it's going to be better than 2K or 1080p, and it should downconvert into absolutely wonderful 1080p (which is the delivery standard worldwide right now). But no, the 3K mode won't hold 3k's worth of detail, it'll hold somewhere around 2.3k worth of detail.

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 10:36 AM
To me it's simple. If you like the way your EX1 looks for $6000 then you'll love the way your Scarlet looks for $6000.
That's an excellent way to look at it.


Not everyone needs 35mm DOF and most of us coming from 1/3" or 1/2" chips will greatly appreciate the added DOF of 2/3" without having to bend over backwards with focus. In all aspects that don't have anything to do with 35mm DOF, the Scarlet should best the DSLR's and probably most dedicated video cameras.
But will it have the features of a dedicated video camera? Will it have the ability to adjust and paint the image, bake that into the look, and deliver that as video footage? Not as raw, but as actual video? If it does, then yeah, it looks like the whole prosumer segment will probably get its collective butt cheeks handed to it on a silver platter.

But my question is -- what if it doesn't? If it doesn't, then doesn't that move the Scarlet into a weird category of its own? Not for broadcast, not for ENG, only for digital cinema... yet it's a digi-cine camera without cinema field of view or DOF, so... that's where my question comes in. What do people feel about that?

If they've gone and made it a full-fledged video camera in addition to a cinema-only camera, then heck, this is absolutely a breakthrough.

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 10:53 AM
But my question is -- what if it doesn't? If it doesn't, then doesn't that move the Scarlet into a weird category of its own? Not for broadcast, not for ENG, only for digital cinema... yet it's a digi-cine camera without cinema field of view or DOF, so... that's where my question comes in. What do people feel about that?

The only place I don't see Scarlet being a good fit is ENG and I don't think it was ever intended to play in that segment. I don't agree with your take of "only for digital cinema". I can see it working for commercials, events, corporate and training videos. Basically anything you were going to spend a little time editing anyway you'd just add the Raw conversion to your current workflow. Seems to me that it's an acceptable trade off for image quality and just like any other "new" format, it'll be supported better by NLE's as time goes by.

Whenever people grumble about new formats being a pain to work with, I always think about the early days of HDV. Remember how big of a PITA that was to work with early on, now it's not much different than messing with DV. The same will eventually happen with Raw and once that's easy to work with something new will come along to upset the apple cart.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 10:53 AM
To be fair you could same thing about any camera. As I understand it because of the OLPF needed to reduce aliasing a native 1920x1080 camera, for example, won't be able to resolve 1920x1080 worth of detail. To get that amount of detail a lager-than-HD imager must be used and sampled down to 1929x1080. Of course there are also cameras and formats that aren't even full faster yet we still call them "HD" even though the images they record will never contain 1280x720 or 1920x1080 'pixels worth' of information.
-A

Saying this about any camera is incorrect and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how camera sensors work.

Single chip Bayers work fundamentally different from 3 chip CCD or CMOS cameras. While alll camera don't meet their intended resolution due to various technical and optical issues - e.g. the EX1 is a native 1080p camera but measure around 1000 lines of 1080p while the HVX uses pixel shift from 3 540 line sensor to aim for 720p, Bayer sensor do not have 1 pixel = 1 intended line of resolution. Red (despite the name) was never 4,000 lines of resolution. The 4.5k mode just uses the full sensor but you give up some feature - it's similar to the Andromeda for the DXV.

I could go into far more detail but this info is widely available online - including on reduser by Red shooters. Adam Wilt has great information on how resolution/sensors work.

My 7D is single chip Bayer. It has 3500 pixels H in still mode but debayering means various reviews have measured much less - 2100 lines with extinction about 3100 lines.

Red cameras are the same and thus can only be compared with Bayer type sensors.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 10:56 AM
I agree with almost everything stephenvv is saying in this thread, but I wanted to examine this a bit further... 3K from the Scarlet is always going to look sharper than 2K or 1080p. Projected 3K will look sharper than 2K projected on the same screen.

Barry - I totally agree with this because it's basic oversampling principles. When I shot my Red commercials for delivery at 1080p, we shot 3K (for better slo-mo) knowing that the oversample of roughly 2.2k real resolution down to 1080p would look great - it did, very sharp but smooth without any resolution artifacts.

Scarlet, assuming it's at least equal to Red One, should look fantastic at 1080p. But it would be soft projected at 3K.

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 11:07 AM
Scarlet, assuming it's at least equal to Red One, should look fantastic at 1080p. But it would be soft projected at 3K.

If you need more resolution, buy or rent an Epic. A good many of us don't need anything more than 1080 for the foreseeable future. If your particular application is features or festivals (in hopes of being picked up as a feature) then shoot with a better camera than the 2/3" Scarlet... in 6 months or so... when they're actually available to be used to shoot something.

Most people in our field don't do feature films that will be projected at 3K resolutions so what's the big deal?

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 11:09 AM
My 7D is single chip Bayer. It has 3500 pixels H in still mode but debayering means various reviews have measured much less - 2100 lines with extinction about 3100 lines.
In still mode, maybe, but in video mode the 7D doesn't get anywhere NEAR those numbers. It'd be lucky to eke out 1.4k horizontally.

Ben_B
12-01-2009, 11:12 AM
Well if you really wanted super shallow DOF with it you could just put some faster glass on it and shoot at a slightly wider aperture than normal...or you could use some more telephoto stuff...that's why if I got one I would spring for the interchangeable lenses model.

That said, I really have a hard time giving a crap about this until I see some actual product photography (not more renders) and a whole lot of footage the damn thing has shot...in the hands of real people (yes that includes Mr. Bloom or whomever they might send a prerelease version to [me!]) not RED.

The only really promising thing here is that the prices went up – what company would announce a price increase on an unreleased product if they weren't actually close to making it something other than vapor?

And boy has this product been vapor for too long...time to condense RED, time to condense. WATER CYCLE JOKE!

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 11:19 AM
The only really promising thing here is that the prices went up what company would announce a price increase on an unreleased product if they weren't actually close to making it something other than vapor?

given the success and market penetration of the Red One, did you really think this thing would never leave the drawing board?


And boy has this product been vapor for too long...

I don't know if it's taken all that long to develop from the ground up, we're just never able to peek behind the curtain from day 1 to see how long the process usually takes. Generally a company announces a new camera once it's been in the prototype stage for a while and is nearing production. Red tossed this idea out there when it was nothing more than a drawing on a napkin and that was their mistake. I think they learned their lesson.

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 11:31 AM
Barry,

Thinking about ENG use, I wonder if you can add a module that gives you better ENG capability? Seems like it makes sense. Maybe an encoding module that can spit out MPEG or whatever flavor of quicktime you're wanting straight to a SSD? What do you think?

Since the outputs can display the particular LUT you're shooting with, I'm sure you can hook up a nano flash or some other device that can take the output and encode it into a more user friendly format. Personally I like to stay within the same family of products so it would be nice to have a Red branded module do this for me, but whatever, I'm just pointing out that it can be done.

Ben_B
12-01-2009, 11:31 AM
Hopefully so. But that's what makes it vapor. That and the numerous announced/changed/vague release dates..

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 11:33 AM
I really have a hard time giving a crap about this until I see some actual product photography (not more renders)

There have been quite a few photos released already -
(thumbnails attached - yes, those are photos, not renders)


...and a whole lot of footage the damn thing has shot...in the hands of real people (yes that includes Mr. Bloom or whomever they might send a prerelease version to [me!]) not RED.

I'm with you on that - I was hoping ot see some footage or frame grabs yesterday, but I"m sure it's coming in the next few months - especially considering the Tattoo program should be started up shortly.

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 11:35 AM
Thinking about ENG use, I wonder if you can add a module that gives you better ENG capability? Seems like it makes sense. Maybe an encoding module that can spit out MPEG or whatever flavor of quicktime you're wanting straight to a SSD? What do you think?
I'm sure anything can be done... the question is at what point does it become not practical to do? Especially with a modular system, they should have the ability to add a module that handles it, but would the end result really be better than an HPX170 or EX1 or HPX300? That's a question we won't have the answer to for quite a while, I'm sure.

bwwd
12-01-2009, 11:40 AM
Dont ever think of sending any RED prototypes to Bloom please.Instead send to film maker or DP willing to spend time with it shooting movie-like scenes ,not random stuff at night and not res charts,just plain simple takes on dolly ,stedicam or crane with proper framing so we could see how it performs where it should peform - on the set.
As for RED cams its a little bit scary that more and more people can afford such advanced cameras ,theres a lot of bad RED footage on the net.

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 11:40 AM
I'm sure anything can be done... the question is at what point does it become not practical to do? Especially with a modular system, they should have the ability to add a module that handles it, but would the end result really be better than an HPX170 or EX1 or HPX300? That's a question we won't have the answer to for quite a while, I'm sure.

Given that you've turned your system into a 2/3" ENG camera that's not locked into one recording format I'd say it'll best the HPX170 and EX1, and you'll have the ability to go back to the higher quality/more flexible Raw recording when not doing ENG work. Thing is, how much will it cost with this imaginary module and all the bits and pieces needed to make it a decent ENG rig?

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 11:41 AM
Dont ever think of sending any RED prototypes to Bloom please.Instead send to film maker or DP willing to spend time with it shooting movie-like scenes ,not random stuff at night and not res charts,just plain simple takes on dolly ,stedicam or crane with proper framing so we could see how it performs where it should peform - on the set.
As for RED cams its a little bit scary that more and more people can afford such advanced cameras ,theres a lot of bad RED footage on the net.

Bloom shoots well, even if it's not a style you prefer. Why bash the guy?

bwwd
12-01-2009, 11:49 AM
Because there are some folks willing to test prototype for free using techniques and equipment used when making real films.
Its not bashing, i just prefere to see first footage from someone else with proper equipment.
Thats how i feel,can i feel it that way?

Stephen Mick
12-01-2009, 11:49 AM
Bloom shoots well, even if it's not a style you prefer. Why bash the guy?

Exactly.

If you want to see how a certain camera performs in certain conditions, sack up and do it yourself. And if you're half the bloke Bloom is, you'll share your results with the class.

bwwd
12-01-2009, 11:52 AM
I would if prototypes would be sent to me,believe me i would.Many guys would.

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 11:57 AM
Because there are some folks willing to test prototype for free using techniques and equipment used when making real films.
Its not bashing, i just prefere to see first footage from someone else with proper equipment.
Thats how i feel,can i feel it that way?

sure, feeling that way is fine, but speaking it out loud in a public forum makes you sound like a jerk.

Red themselves will give you the 'proper' footage, let Bloom give you the 'what the rest of us will be shooting' footage.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 11:59 AM
In still mode, maybe, but in video mode the 7D doesn't get anywhere NEAR those numbers. It'd be lucky to eke out 1.4k horizontally.

No argument as I was only talking about still mode to illustrate deBayering.

But having shot a bunch now with my 7D the resolution is a puzzle. It often looks sharper than my HV30 ever was but sometime looks softer - all without obvious aliasing effects. And when aliasing is obvious, it does look fugly but other times looks near as sharp as EX1.

I'm guessing the 7D and other video DSLRs have "variable resolution" depending on how much aliasing, angle to pixels binning, how much false detail etc. is going on in a given frame, focal length, line angle etc.

So the 2/3" Scarlet should win the resolution battle - but it would be a much better battle if the basic kit was $3000 not $4750. That's not a revolution, that's just competition.

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 12:00 PM
Because there are some folks willing to test prototype for free using techniques and equipment used when making real films.
Its not bashing, i just prefere to see first footage from someone else with proper equipment.
Thats how i feel,can i feel it that way?

There are a variety of uses for a camera, and what you want to see may not be relevant to everyone else. This is why charts are useful. People taking it out and shooting all kinds of random stuff can be useful. People using it on a film set can be useful. Using it in eng settings can be useful.

personally, I'll take anything and everything I can get vs. "unless you only shoot this, it's pointless".

Later,
Jason

bwwd
12-01-2009, 12:02 PM
Cool but its raw,its predictable how charts would look like yes ?

Chamber005
12-01-2009, 12:06 PM
sure, feeling that way is fine, but speaking it out loud in a public forum makes you sound like a jerk.

Red themselves will give you the 'proper' footage, let Bloom give you the 'what the rest of us will be shooting' footage.


Man, PB is my shizzel. He is on a short list of 5 people in the entire online DV community whose opinion I actually trust.

But again, I still think the greatest thing about the coming Scarlet will be its affect on the rest of the cameras (both used and new) out there. Even if there's only a handful of people who are able to really effectively stretch the Scarlet to its greatest capacity, other companies will have to take notice and will then have to (really) compete.

Personally I think the Scarlet will lead to a direct price drop on EX1s and 5DIIs. I think a lot of people will be selling off these cams to grab the new Scarlets -- which will be a huge impact on the indie community overall.

No matter what, Scarlet = awesome.

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 12:08 PM
Cool but its raw,its predictable how charts would look like yes ?

not necessarily. The purpose of charts is to find the potential short comings of any camera, and also where it might shine in relation to others.

At what point does aliasing begin, is there any funkiness going on with how it renders patterns, etc, etc, etc.

We're probably looking at potentially 2.3. to 2.5k of resolved detail. How much of that will be useable, etc.

laer,
jason

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 12:13 PM
Personally I think the Scarlet will lead to a direct price drop on EX1s and 5DIIs. I think a lot of people will be selling off these cams to grab the new Scarlets -- which will be a huge impact on the indie community overall.

No matter what, Scarlet = awesome.

Well, you can think that but I'm seeing almost no evidence of that. If Scarlet 2/3" were shipping today, I can't see myself dumping my 7D for it. I don't want a fixed lens and $5000 for a set of primes puts it near $10k.

The S35 Scarlet is the interesting cam but pricing already looks to put it out of reach for me (where as EX1, 5D are all within range).

So unless you've got evidence to back up that "a lot of people will sell to get a Scarlet" - meaning lots of people will give up FF or S35 sensor with interchangeble lens for 2/3" sensor with fixed lens, I think the jury is out.

No matter what, Scarlet = expensive

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 12:17 PM
No matter what, Scarlet = expensive

I guess it depends on what you compare it to.

Again, keeping in mind that it doesn't bother me in the least that it's a 2/3" sensor... When, I look at the specs, it looks stupidly cheap to me. One man's expensive, is another man's bargain I guess.

but, then... I wouldn't compare it to a 7d in terms of features and performance, so a 7d is not my benchmark for determining the "value" of a Scarlet.

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 12:26 PM
I guess it depends on what you compare it to.

Again, keeping in mind that it doesn't bother me in the least that it's a 2/3" sensor... When, I look at the specs, it looks stupidly cheap to me. One man's expensive, is another man's bargain I guess.

but, then... I wouldn't compare it to a 7d in terms of features and performance, so a 7d is not my benchmark for determining the "value" of a Scarlet.

amen, amen, and amen.

I'm not even sure I can drop the cash on a Scarlet, but I've been around the business long enough to know $6,000 to $10,000 is crazy cheap for the supposed image quality you'll get with one.

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 12:28 PM
William_Robinette

Yes, but until you hold it how can you be sure of the way it handles? You are making assumptions based on a picture.

O.K. I cant assume things? If I look at a puffer fish I'm probably going to assume that it is uncomfortable to handle.



What is a good kit? 3K to CF cards with 24/48k dual channel audio + power, control, and monitoring seems solid to me

2.8 inch screen my eyes are not that good. Need an Upgrade


Have you ever posted R3D's? I have. It's easy. It was easy 12 months ago, and we are still 6 months out.

Then why would anyone buy a Red Rocket. I doubt people are dropping 5 grand on a card because they are frivolous spenders.


Are you suggesting camera makers stay still so as to not disturb the waters?

No. Im suggesting things get confusing and mixed up after 2 years worth of announcements

Remains to be seen, but Jarred said himself they were fantastic glass. Do you think he would make statements like that if they weren't?

Jarred works for RED he's not going to say wow, we really F this glass up.





Again, true. But you can understand why.

Have you used RED? It has it's problems for sure, but if you learn it like any other camera system I think one finds it is really not any harder. It is just different.



RED One is 3.2K in 4K mode, and they have now released a 4.5K mode. Until you have seen 3K from scarlet projected I don't think you can really say if it is soft or not. And show me any 1080p camera that is resolving all that is stated. If it is I would bet you the aliasing would make it unusable.

zeke
12-01-2009, 12:30 PM
Somone mentioned 4:2:2 color. the Scarlet will output 4:4:4 in raw mode. Plus Gigabit Ethernet or Wireless for camera control and transfering files from the CF cards. Gps and that other stuff for recording tilt and direction and can be included in the metadata.
Things not included in current cameras from the others. It will also do 1080x60p, the holy grail for those doing syndicated live action shows. All at no extra charge. And last time I checked, CF cards are still a lot cheaper then P2.

I'm also sure RedRock and others will have 35mm adaptors out in no time if that is what you need.

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 12:31 PM
It's not red but AJA maybe...i dont know just a thought

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 12:32 PM
I'm guessing the 7D and other video DSLRs have "variable resolution" depending on how much aliasing, angle to pixels binning, how much false detail etc. is going on in a given frame, focal length, line angle etc.
Well, resolution is fixed -- it can resolve what it can resolve. But aliasing is "false resolution" -- and that is what leads to the variable results.


So the 2/3" Scarlet should win the resolution battle - but it would be a much better battle if the basic kit was $3000 not $4750. That's not a revolution, that's just competition.
Yeah, but -- it also does 150fps! It also takes stereo input. It also has the ability to send a separate monitor output while keeping the onboard working. Plus pure resolution, no aliasing, more dynamic range, etc.

I mean, don't get me wrong -- I think the Scarlet will have many features that will make it much more desirable in many ways over a DSLR! But the question I haven't settled on is... will people be willing to pay more for it, 3x more, and give up their cinema-shallow DOF... I have no question whatsoever that the Scarlet will be a superior camera to all the SLRs in terms of sharpness, image quality, and dynamic range.

But is the 2/3" vs. 35mm a dealbreaker? Or is the prospect of cheap 35mm with problems, a more tantalizing prospect than relatively problem-free 2/3", especially when the 2/3" costs 3x as much?

Just curious as to what the feeling is among DVXUsers...

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 12:33 PM
Cool but its raw,its predictable how charts would look like yes ?
Not just charts, but footage too. Assuming it operates similarly to the Red One, and I have no reason to think it doesn't.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 12:37 PM
When, I look at the specs, it looks stupidly cheap to me. One man's expensive, is another man's bargain I guess.

Stupidly cheap compared to what? I was responding to someone saying EX1, 5D MkII's, GH1s and 7D would be dumped for Scarlets. It's clearly not stupidly cheap compared to those.

It's only stupidly cheap compared to $20k cam - that buys a pretty nice 2/3" camera these days.

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 12:37 PM
No matter what, Scarlet = expensive
Not necessarily! Depends on what it actually does (which, of course, we still don't know the full extent) and what it would cost to do that with other equipment.

How many DSLRs can shoot 150fps? How many video cameras can shoot 150fps? Scarlet might be the cheapest 150fps camera on the market.

How many 2/3" cameras are on the market at anywhere less than $8,000? Scarlet's half that.

So for what it is, it could be argued that it's dirt cheap.

I can see where you're coming from, in that compared to an SLR it's expensive, but -- an SLR is a very, very, very limited piece of equipment, so is it a fair comparison to put an SLR up against a 150fps variable-frame-rate 3K alias-free product that actually records stereo sound onboard with proper connectors and no AGC?

I think the Scarlet is pretty darn cheap for what it is. I just don't know if it's what the DVXUsers want; if the chip size and cost is going to be "worth it" versus the current love affair with the DSLRs.

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 12:40 PM
Somone mentioned 4:2:2 color. the Scarlet will output 4:4:4 in raw mode.
Whoa nelly there -- that's a very misleading statement.

4:4:4 -- as per what? As for 3K? No way. As for 2K? I don't think so. At 720p? Maybe.

Just because the codec is 4:4:4, doesn't mean that you'll get footage with 4:4:4 color sampling in it. I think Graeme Nattress claims that the Red One delivers 3.2:1.6:1.6. (or some other odd ratio). It's pretty commonly accepted that the best you can get out of a Bayer sensor is 4:2:0. So you'd have to go to 1/4 res to get 4:4:4, and that would mean 1500 wide, which would mean 720p.

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 12:42 PM
Stupidly cheap compared to what? I was responding to someone saying EX1, 5D MkII's, GH1s and 7D would be dumped for Scarlets. It's clearly not stupidly cheap compared to those.

It's only stupidly cheap compared to $20k cam - that buys a pretty nice 2/3" camera these days.

You seem to be calling it 'cheap' or 'expensive' based solely on price, not taking into account features.

The Scarlet and the EX1 are completely different cameras - as are the 7D and the EX1, etc etc. You can't simply compare them on price, you have to compare the features and abilities of each.

For many, the Scarlet will be 'stupidly cheap' - because those features which seperate it from the EX1, and other cams, are important to them.

By the same argument you're making, I could say that the EX1 is crazy expensive compared to a 7D. They both shoot 1080, and the 7D has a 35mm sized sensor... so why would anyone get an EX1?

Just playing devil's advocate there to prove a point.
On top of all this is the other thing that everyone seems to continually forget - which is that buying a Scarlet is not simply buying a static camera...it's buying into the modular camera system. For some that's not a good thing - but for many, its groundbreaking.

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 12:45 PM
Not necessarily! Depends on what it actually does (which, of course, we still don't know the full extent) and what it would cost to do that with other equipment.

How many DSLRs can shoot 150fps? How many video cameras can shoot 150fps? Scarlet might be the cheapest 150fps camera on the market.

How many 2/3" cameras are on the market at anywhere less than $8,000? Scarlet's half that.



150 fps is really cool thats good for scarlet but you cant even mount it to a tripod without spending more money.

So for 4750 you get a handheld box with a 8x zoom fixed lens that is very limited in its own ways.

LOL I will probably buy a scarlet and drop over 10 K on it. I am not trying to be negative just weighing the pros and cons.

It seems to be in your nature to be helpful and try to bring out the best in things so some of us take advantage of that but its all in fun.

Loving the options they are pretty insane! :grin:

Stephen Mick
12-01-2009, 12:46 PM
The good thing is, in about seven months, we MIGHT have an answer to all of the questions and speculation. And, who knows, we might even get to see footage sometime before then. And I'll be as interested as anyone to see what Scarlet can do, as opposed to judging and speculating what it might do or what it might end up costing.

Is 150fps epic-awesomeness for (lets say) $5K? Hellz yeah.
Is 2/3" a deal-breaker for some? Maybe. Less so for others, including myself.

In my mind, if it arrives as a "digital cinema camera" without the usability or convenience of cameras like the HPX170 and EX1, I'll pass. But if it delivers RED quality, in a compact (ergonomically workable) form factor, with a workflow that makes my shooting life easier, I'll be waiting in line to buy one.

Until more information comes along to answer my questions and address my needs, I'll be busy shooting and editing. Someone wake me up when there's more than just pictures on a white cyc and specs that could change at any time.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 12:47 PM
Well, resolution is fixed -- it can resolve what it can resolve.

Not necessarily - resolution varies with motion cameras (e.g. Adam Wilt's wobble rez test) as well as with noise, lens issues etc. The 7D clearly has something going on with aliasing based on angle of lines in camera (see my moire test - it's very clear resolution is variable there).


Yeah, but -- it also does 150fps! It also takes stereo input. It also has the ability to send a separate monitor output while keeping the onboard working. Plus pure resolution, no aliasing, more dynamic range, etc.

150fps vs 60fps is nice but hardly worth the cost difference as I don't crave that level of slo-mo very often and I get very good 120fps from 60fps via Twixtor.

Stereo input could not care less. I've been shooting double system with Zoom 4Hn and love it - better way to shoot especially with Plural Eyes autosync software.

Seperate monitor - nice, but I'm hoping for a new Canon body by the time this ships with at least that feature if not more.

No aliasing is good but I have a few hours of 7D in the can with not a single shot bothered by aliasing. Dynamic range - well, not tested yet. That could be a compelling feature but 2/3" noise issues may mean not nearly as good. Jury's out.

So, in answer to your question - for me, Scarlet as announced is interesting, but I sum it up as "competition not revolution". Thus, unless nothing happens video DSLR wise by the time Scarlet ships and it ships as a home run, I can't imagine stepping back to 2/3" sensor and or fixed lens camera.

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 12:48 PM
But is the 2/3" vs. 35mm a dealbreaker?

Not in the least for me. Low on my list of priorities. Many, many other things that trump that for me, and you've named a good deal of them in your previous post.

I've got my calculator and I know what kind of DoF I'll be getting at x focal length at x f-stop, at x distance from the lens


Or is the prospect of cheap 35mm with problems, a more tantalizing prospect than relatively problem-free 2/3", especially when the 2/3" costs 3x as much?

Not for me. but again... that's b/c sensor size is not at the top of my list of priorities.

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 12:55 PM
I have to ask was anyone surprised by the size of the scarlet?

it is a lot smaller than I thought it would be. I can see pros and cons to that as well.

It looks to be about half the size of the red one. I dont know more speculation but thats all we have anyway.

stephenvv
12-01-2009, 12:56 PM
You seem to be calling it 'cheap' or 'expensive' based solely on price, not taking into account features.

No, it's simply a matter of reality for many buyers that there are absolutely price points they can't move beyond. So while EX1 and 7D are very different cameras, they fall into a hard price point that determines buyers and sales.

Scarlet won't succeed without a healthy number of buyers in the given market segment. That means EX1, 5D, HVX, HPX 170, HMC series etc. buyers.

I think Scarlet is only "stupidly cheap" compared to other 2/3" video camera right now. And it's not shipping until next summer at the earliest. It does not seem like a crazy stretch that Panasonic, JVC or Sony could release a $10k (with lens) 2/3" camera with 120 fps by next summer.

The 2/3" Scarlet was originally presented by Red as revolution in low budget motion picture cameras. If it had shipped at end of last year, it would be be.

Now, it's just another camera - interesting and hopefully high quality but it's far too late already to grab the indie world the way the Red One did or the prosumer world the way the DVX/HV20-30-40 or video DSLR's have).

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 01:01 PM
I look at it's price vs. performance and feature set. That's how I come to a determination of whether it is a good value or not (For what I am looking for). And, for the things that I'm looking for... yes... I see it as a very good value in price : performance.

There are 7d owners who were shooting on 10,000 dollar rigs prior. there are also 7d owners who stretched themselves to move from an HV20 to a 7d.

You are right. It is just another camera. For me, it's looking like a great deal for what I am looking for. For you, it's "expensive".

When I look at features that are important to me, I look at the price point of other camera's that include some of those features. Scarlet is "stupidly cheap" for ME, for what I'm looking for. For someone who cares heavily about sensor size and "can't see going back to 2/3"", then yeah... it's expensive b/c that's what is important to them and they can get 1600 dollar 7d for that if that's at or near the top of their list.

Later,
Jason

Max Smith
12-01-2009, 01:07 PM
No, it's simply a matter of reality for many buyers that there are absolutely price points they can't move beyond. So while EX1 and 7D are very different cameras, they fall into a hard price point that determines buyers and sales.

Scarlet won't succeed without a healthy number of buyers in the given market segment. That means EX1, 5D, HVX, HPX 170, HMC series etc. buyers.

I think Scarlet is only "stupidly cheap" compared to other 2/3" video camera right now. And it's not shipping until next summer at the earliest. It does not seem like a crazy stretch that Panasonic, JVC or Sony could release a $10k (with lens) 2/3" camera with 120 fps by next summer.

The 2/3" Scarlet was originally presented by Red as revolution in low budget motion picture cameras. If it had shipped at end of last year, it would be be.

Now, it's just another camera - interesting and hopefully high quality but it's far too late already to grab the indie world the way the Red One did or the prosumer world the way the DVX/HV20-30-40 or video DSLR's have).


Actually this was the point of my original post. It's that market range, and maybe higher if you include Sony's upcoming PMW 350, that gets squeezed considerably if and when RED delivers what it just announced.

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 01:19 PM
I have to ask was anyone surprised by the size of the scarlet?

it is a lot smaller than I thought it would be. I can see pros and cons to that as well.

Yeah, that kind of took me by surprise as well.
I thought it was quite a bit bigger than that side by side with the D3 reveals it to be.

Isaac_Brody
12-01-2009, 01:36 PM
It was nice to get prices and specs but I have to admit I'll only get excited when they start to deliver cameras. They say Summer 2010, which given the history of changes and hiccups that could happen between now and then reads more like 2011.

I would love to start a betting pool for when people think the Scarlet S35 will ship. I'm thinking 2011. :)

There's one thing I wish would change, design. This cold black military design while intimidating is starting to feel dated. This is where I wish Red would take a design clue from apple. I'm guessing that will be a 500 dollar module I'll have to buy for a smooth practical handle that won't gouge me when holding it.

ethan cooper
12-01-2009, 01:38 PM
I think Red learned some lessons the hard way this past year. I'd bet the proposed dates are within a month or two.

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 01:40 PM
I think Red learned some lessons the hard way this past year. I'd bet the proposed dates are within a month or two.

Let's hope - but things change, things go wrong, etc....
fingers crossed.

Isaac_Brody
12-01-2009, 01:45 PM
Red just had an ASIC delay that affected delivery of tattoo cameras. They've been up front and said that they're adding more features which will make things more complicated. Plenty that can go wrong and will go wrong between now and Summer.

And of course by next Summer there's a very good chance the next round of VDSLR's will be out. GH2, or whatever it's called will probably improve on the current issues we've all hashed to death. Gotta love progress.

I have no doubt when Red delivers the quality will be awesome and I bet it will have plenty of flaws for us to pick over. I'm just not sure the quality difference will be worth the extra 6 - 7 thousand versus a GH2/7D3/5DIII. If they sort out the aliasing and downrezzing issues a lot of folks won't see the need to spend 10K on a Scarlet kit.

stip
12-01-2009, 02:13 PM
There's one thing I wish would change, design. This cold black military design while intimidating is starting to feel dated. This is where I wish Red would take a design clue from apple.

Agree with every line.
I love the plain design of Ikonoskop's A-Cam dII.

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 02:49 PM
Something that bothers me about RED ..


The Red One is a revolutionary camera it's ridiculously good IMO .. when its used right it is amazing.



Why destroy or discontinue it ? I understand epic is suppose to be better but it's not a ONE and sometimes in reality specs are not better.

Why not sell it for a discount?

greymog
12-01-2009, 02:49 PM
Agree with every line.
I love the plain design of Ikonoskop's A-Cam dII.

It's funny how that, in a field like film, a technical limit may mature into tradition. I am not sure, I am new, but I read that 24 fps was as far as the machines could go back in the day, and the resulting look became trademark over the years.

I'm not disputing 24fps, other options have been tried, and most people have spoken.

Yet the box itself, the basic ergonomic of a camera that shoots video, AFAIK, has never been put to hard scrutiny.

A RED is still a box, from a design point of view. Ikonoskop have realized the importance of size, and simplicity to describe efficiency. Apple's statement was one button instead of two, then no button eventually.

Everyone's getting gestural. Minority report would be the most obvious example of gestural control, the KAOSS pad a more niche example, to the audio heads.

I read once about some project in redesigning fully the camera's ergonomic, and it's a wild idea, but thought I'd share for funsies, and in just maybe trying to push some thoughts into the dark way past what we take for granted and/or tradition as far as a camera's design, ergonomically.

Much like with work that isn't intended for distribution, you can do whatever you want. This post isn't geared toward anything materializing i'm just thinking, but myself and some colleagues spoke about possibly wearing a 2/3" against a viewfinder, and mounting that 'brain' as it has been coined, either conventionally or on the body.

Control would be the interesting part in affecting design. If control was something other than tactile, then form can be scrutinized. As long as there's a button to push, as long as there's a focus wheel to turn, control will govern the form of our tools.

If control was gestural, and the display (menu status monitor etc) was fed to an EVF, worn on the body (think martin margiela's incognito pilot not x-men lol) , and say, the cyberglove (this is something available) or any gestural control device, we'll say the gloves, you'll find that the shape necessary for handling a camera can change dramatically.

This all came up and stayed on paper and on my blog as just a thought for a good few months after a friend said, 'no buttons', and another said, 'i don't wanna hold anything'.

It's really far fetched, but out of all manufacturers out there, RED can have the balls to try a new crack at control. They're trying a new crack at picture, once that's well on it's way as a standard maybe the next step would be to change the way we learn to shoot. Another language on the cv. In the classrooms.

The technology is there, the approach to most specialty audio MIDI controllers has become very gestural. I read about this glove somewhere, and it's very interesting how it works, changing value as you bend each finger.

This can result in combinations, or a language, to operate the machinery, and say control focus or frame rate during recording on one hand, rolling and cutting with the other. A fist is 24 fps, hand spread out would be 150, so just open your hand as you keep your eye on the ball when you want your ramp.

Most of all, scrutinizing the control aspect at the root of design and goin gestural (if it can possibly work) would mean in effect, putting the camera's functions into character, with human response. Like a DJ on a MIDI fader cutting a few bars live. As he moves the switches, the volume envelope changes etc.

I've been trying to make this work with a few friends with the help of the Apertus team. They've been working on an open source 2/3" sensor that shoots RAW. It's good enough for me spec wise as how its running to try and make this work. We spoke, they sent me parts, and I began tinkering obliviously (as I am not a tech person, my background is in design and audio), and I have yet to find a feasible solution to doin something different before I hit them up for real parts and not 3d ones.

This is a sidetrack, but in a discussion where for the first time, a manufacturer is kinda expected to change the fundamental ergonomic in a way that'll surprise us, but we still have a box. We expect this of RED coz of their 'amazing' factor, and the whole revolution approach.

I dunno, what do you think? Quite the ramble, but what could RED possibly do to change control? is control something that governs the shape indefinitely? if changed can it put form into question? do other factors make for the same shape regardless of control ie balance weight etc? I think control is important, and has become tradition.

I hate to say it, but focus pullers will have a fit at a change like this for the short term till they learn new control.

Please excuse me I keep making rambly posts like this, but wanted to share this thought. It's way too wild, and it's coming from someone who is really new at this, but i think i could be on to something, and RED really are the only people I think that can muster up something like this.

RED Gestural control. No buttons, Nothing to hold. The camera's functions in character if need be.

Some little bean like thing with a mount that can be stuck anywhere and is tiny. Something you can wear? REDSUIT?

Jesus I post now I could go on forever

T

Zacatac
12-01-2009, 02:54 PM
The scarlet is like a film camera, you don't grab one and put it on your shoulder, yes, they've made the Aaton easily shoulder mountable, but if you want scarlet to go handheld, you need the addons.... film companies have been doing it for years

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 03:30 PM
In my mind, if it arrives as a "digital cinema camera" without the usability or convenience of cameras like the HPX170 and EX1, I'll pass. But if it delivers RED quality, in a compact (ergonomically workable) form factor, with a workflow that makes my shooting life easier, I'll be waiting in line to buy one.
Agreed. Except that I might just choke down whatever the price increase is and go for the S35 version, but other than that I agree completely.


Until more information comes along to answer my questions and address my needs, I'll be busy shooting and editing. Someone wake me up when there's more than just pictures on a white cyc and specs that could change at any time.
I heart Stephen Mick.

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 03:32 PM
Actually this was the point of my original post. It's that market range, and maybe higher if you include Sony's upcoming PMW 350, that gets squeezed considerably if and when RED delivers what it just announced.
Not necessarily. It depends on what it costs to configure it to do what the video cameras do. The Red One isn't a video camera. I don't expect the Scarlet to be either, although they may surprise us. (I'm kind of "counting on it").

Barry_Green
12-01-2009, 03:35 PM
I think Red learned some lessons the hard way this past year. I'd bet the proposed dates are within a month or two.
Personally, I would be willing to wager that the Scarlet ship dates are going to be tied to the Epic date. As in, if the Epic ships quickly, if it emerges from the beta test/tattoo program quickly, then Scarlet will come out that more quickly. But if the Epic takes quite a while, then Scarlet will be delayed.

Red's first priority is (and should be to) the Epic customers. They shouldn't and probably won't divert attention away from the Epic to the Scarlet. So, as far as realistic ship dates go, I'd pay attention to the Epic to see how it proceeds, because I think it's entirely reasonable to say that Epic's progress will directly influence Scarlet's progress.

ChipG
12-01-2009, 03:40 PM
I have to ask was anyone surprised by the size of the scarlet?

it is a lot smaller than I thought it would be. I can see pros and cons to that as well.

It looks to be about half the size of the red one. I dont know more speculation but thats all we have anyway.

I was, the pic of it by the nikon d3 got my attenton more than any other pic or render of it.

So this thing doesn't even have a 3/8 inch hole to mount it to a tripod? That can't be right?

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 03:45 PM
I was, the pic of it by the nikon d3 got my attenton more than any other pic or render of it.

So this thing doesn't even have a 3/8 inch hole to mount it to a tripod? That can't be right?

I cant confirm but over on scarlet user they are saying it has the tripod mounts on the bottom


the fixed scarlet is smaller than a canon hfs10 ? or similiar size if so no thanks .. i like the idea of having the red one size just cheaper

The idea of a "glove" or another organic way of controlling the cam is crazy and I love it would be awesome to see the director ..

standing there waving his arms like a conductor of a symphony because in many ways he is ..
:grin::grin:

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 03:48 PM
Personally, I would be willing to wager that the Scarlet ship dates are going to be tied to the Epic date. As in, if the Epic ships quickly, if it emerges from the beta test/tattoo program quickly, then Scarlet will come out that more quickly. But if the Epic takes quite a while, then Scarlet will be delayed.

Red's first priority is (and should be to) the Epic customers. They shouldn't and probably won't divert attention away from the Epic to the Scarlet. So, as far as realistic ship dates go, I'd pay attention to the Epic to see how it proceeds, because I think it's entirely reasonable to say that Epic's progress will directly influence Scarlet's progress.

agree 100%

so that means if they have a date for Scarlet as June ..

Epic would be April , may

So Epic april/may

scarlet / june

sounds good

Chamber005
12-01-2009, 03:51 PM
agree 100%

so that means if they have a date for Scarlet as June ..

Epic would be April , may

So Epic april/may

scarlet / june

sounds good

And I will look for EX1s and Mark 5D IIs on ebay in July...

Awesome possum!

:beer:

Stephen Mick
12-01-2009, 03:51 PM
I heart Stephen Mick.

And yet Barry Green has not accepted my Facebook friend request. I'm confused. :D

Jason Ramsey
12-01-2009, 04:05 PM
these are the ports on the back of the 8x fixed for anyone interested.

real photo:
http://red.cachefly.net/N30/ports.jpg

Oh. and you can see the tripod mount on the bottom. Don't know where people got the idea that there is no way to mount it to the tripod. Never heard any such thing.

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 04:08 PM
Don't know where people got the idea that there is no way to mount it to the tripod. Never heard any such thing.

I heard there is no way to hold it either, unless you buy special RED magnetic gloves.
Without those, it will simply slip out of your hands.

I don't know, that's just what I heard.
:)

chrislancaster
12-01-2009, 04:16 PM
I heard there is no way to hold it either, unless you buy special RED magnetic gloves.
Without those, it will simply slip out of your hands.

I don't know, that's just what I heard.
:)

HAHA hilarious :grin:..rumors spread fast


some things sound crazy but when something new comes out thats different and being sold as revoultionary you really cant assume anything.

Maybe RED would have a reason not to. Dont know what but doesnt mean it cant happen

ChipG
12-01-2009, 04:19 PM
Oh. and you can see the tripod mount on the bottom. Don't know where people got the idea that there is no way to mount it to the tripod. Never heard any such thing.

Thanks :thumbup: I thought it sounded a little far fetched to not have a screw hole for a tripod mount.

ChipG
12-01-2009, 04:20 PM
Jason, do you know the deminsions of the scarlet?

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 04:22 PM
Jason, do you know the deminsions of the scarlet?

What are the dimensions of a D3 - you could probably get a pretty close approximation looking at that side by side pic, and then extrapolating that info to figure out the depth from the Scarlet side view pic....

.... I'm just too lazy to do it myself.
:)

Zacatac
12-01-2009, 04:23 PM
What are the dimensions of a D3 - you could probably get a pretty close approximation looking at that side by side pic, and then extrapolating that info to figure out the depth from the Scarlet side view pic....

.... I'm just too lazy to do it myself.
:)

I did a little photoshop measuring, the Redmote is about the size of a Ipod Touch, just thicker, as for the rest of the Scarlet, didn't measure... lol

Luis Caffesse
12-01-2009, 04:28 PM
My GUESS would be around 3-3.5" wide, roughly 6" tall....and maybe 3.5-4" deep
(just for the Brain itself)

But - just a rough estimation based on the D3 pic.
I could be way off.


EDITED TO ADD:
Looked up the D3 specs -

H x W x D = 6.3 x 6.2 x 3.4" (160 x 157 x 88mm)

VGurcu
12-01-2009, 09:32 PM
No matter what, Scarlet = expensive
I agree with Stephen.
A proper Scarlet cinema 2/3(interchangeable) camera can easily hit $10K without a prime lens kit. And if you want to add a HD zoom lens you are easily around $20K.
Sony PMW-350 will be sold for $22K that comes with Fujinon 16x HD lens. What is more it has 3x 2/3 CMOS chips, as opposed to 1 CMOS Red Scarlet.
So in my case(event videographer, a zoom lens is a must)) Scarlet is far from cheap.
Also HD zoom lenses are designed for 3 chips, do we even know that these lenses will fit into a single cheap camera like Scarlet???

Here is the $Million question:
If Sony produced PMW-350 with a single 2/3 CMOS as opposed to 3, how much cheaper would it be? -Is it even possible?{ Cause if it is, expect Sony to come up with one before RED.}

Not:Yes you can argue that Scarlet has better functions like higher frame rates & little bit better codec & just a little bit more resolution, but aside from that remember it is after all a single chip camera...And the fixed version has a very limited optical zoom(8x not enough for me)

killacam
12-02-2009, 01:13 AM
I agree with Stephen.
A proper Scarlet cinema 2/3(interchangeable) camera can easily hit $10K without a prime lens kit. And if you want to add a HD zoom lens you are easily around $20K.
Sony PMW-350 will be sold for $22K that comes with Fujinon 16x HD lens. What is more it has 3x 2/3 CMOS chips, as opposed to 1 CMOS Red Scarlet.
So in my case(event videographer, a zoom lens is a must)) Scarlet is far from cheap.
Also HD zoom lenses are designed for 3 chips, do we even know that these lenses will fit into a single cheap camera like Scarlet???

Here is the $Million question:
If Sony produced PMW-350 with a single 2/3 CMOS as opposed to 3, how much cheaper would it be? -Is it even possible?{ Cause if it is, expect Sony to come up with one before RED.}

Not:Yes you can argue that Scarlet has better functions like higher frame rates & little bit better codec & just a little bit more resolution, but aside from that remember it is after all a single chip camera...And the fixed version has a very limited optical zoom(8x not enough for me)

a little bit better codec? isn't the pmw-350 mpeg-2 at 35mbps? and 4:2:0? sure you could add a nanoflash to it to get it to 100mbps and 4:2:2 but that's 3 grand. also, the scarlet fixed is $4750. that's a lot less than the $20k the 350 will go for. the pmw-350 does look nice though and might be better suited for ENG use.

the hpx500 might be a better comparison. it's a 2/3" camera at around $10k, but it also does the same pixel shifting that the hvx does.

Duke M.
12-02-2009, 05:26 AM
Personally, I would be willing to wager that the Scarlet ship dates are going to be tied to the Epic date. As in, if the Epic ships quickly, if it emerges from the beta test/tattoo program quickly, then Scarlet will come out that more quickly. But if the Epic takes quite a while, then Scarlet will be delayed.

Many/most of the Scarlet parts are supposed to be shared with the Epic so I entirely agree with you.

The whole problem with this announcement is that they don't even have a completed ASIC, they have to do the respin. That means they haven't done any testing of the software on that computer. What if other respins are required?

You don't often get software or chips bug free the first time. Remember they are on version 21 now for the Red One firmware, so those delivery dates are likely to be pretty soft for several reasons.

Also, I seem to recall that they promised the first Scarlets to current Red owners, didn't they? If they give 15 scarlets to big name directors, is that meeting the delivery date?

philiplipetz
12-02-2009, 07:24 AM
that f1.9 isn't fixed throughout the zoom range is it?

There are lots of advantages (to me) that make it well worth the price. I'm not really into the whole debating thing too much over it though. Lots and lots of choices for folks out there and that will be out there down the line, that can work in more than one arena, and are effectively suited for multiple tasks.

Without going into debate, I'll just have to respectfully disagree with you that there aren't going to be a lot of folks interested in the 2/3" models. I've seen quite a few who are very interested and they are coming from all different areas. Everyone has their own needs/wants.

I think the differences will become more apparent to some folks as time goes on and these things finally make it into hands.

I can think of ex and hvx users who are seriously looking at a scarlet. I can think of gh1 and 7d users who are as well. I can also think of 7d users who came from a hv20 and are happy and content, and hpx users who are more than happy with what that camera can do for their needs and don't need/want a scarlet or some other camera.. And, folks who use several of the above mentioned for different tasks.

anyways...

To each his own.

Later,
jason
Jason has a great point when he suggests that Scarlet may appeal to new audiences of 7d/GH1 owners. I am such a person and will most likely place a order. People like me have no history with standard high end video equipment. We are obviously willing to accept new paradigms as long as they let us do things that were previously beyond our capacity. The fact that we were willing to accept the unusual workflows of video on digital SLRs has opened us to new ways of doing video.

I could go on but it boils down to competing viewpoints. Video pros ask how Red will let them work in normal ways. The 7d/GH1 audience does not care about old work flows. They just want the maximum power for the lowest price. This is what Red is selling at all levels. I was just at a demo of a Red One and the pros were not as thrilled as the Indie filmakers who did not care if Red made them work in a new way. They saw power now and ways to buy more power when needed with new modules.

This highlights perhaps the most important point about the 7d/GH1 indie market. This market NEEDS high end output but does not have the jobs to justify the approach I read here of "just buy something now and it will quickly pay for itself and then you can get something better." There are many quality conscious buyers who cannot view cameras as disposable. They (we) can only buy a system every five years (at best) and want something that will grow as needed. This is the Scarlet market.

Yes Red suffers from delays but Red had also shown that it continually upgrades existing products without making buyers get totally new hardware for each incremental improvement. If I am going to the max to get a camera I will have to live with for a long time this makes me feel good.

Starshine Video
12-02-2009, 09:53 AM
I agree with Stephen.
A proper Scarlet cinema 2/3(interchangeable) camera can easily hit $10K without a prime lens kit. And if you want to add a HD zoom lens you are easily around $20K.
Sony PMW-350 will be sold for $22K that comes with Fujinon 16x HD lens. What is more it has 3x 2/3 CMOS chips, as opposed to 1 CMOS Red Scarlet.
So in my case(event videographer, a zoom lens is a must)) Scarlet is far from cheap.
Also HD zoom lenses are designed for 3 chips, do we even know that these lenses will fit into a single cheap camera like Scarlet???

Here is the $Million question:
If Sony produced PMW-350 with a single 2/3 CMOS as opposed to 3, how much cheaper would it be? -Is it even possible?{ Cause if it is, expect Sony to come up with one before RED.}

Not:Yes you can argue that Scarlet has better functions like higher frame rates & little bit better codec & just a little bit more resolution, but aside from that remember it is after all a single chip camera...And the fixed version has a very limited optical zoom(8x not enough for me)

a little better resolution?? 3k is a huge jump in resolution from HD.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s95/emando/3k.jpg
Plus yeah the codec in the scarlet is way better and the ability to go to 120fps is a huge deal. Is it the right camera for a wedding videographer? IMO, no its not. But don't short change it and undersell its huge advantages in some attempt to prove your point.

Barry_Green
12-02-2009, 10:05 AM
a little better resolution?? 3k is a huge jump in resolution from HD.
Well, yes and no. A true 3K worth of detail would be indeed a big jump over HD, it would mean a frame that was 2.5 times as big.

Problem is, the 3K on the Scarlet is Bayer, meaning it needs to be demosaic'd, meaning at least a 22% loss in res, and usually more like 25%. Which means, for practical purposes, shooting 5K makes for a really good 4K. Shooting 4K makes for a great 3K. Shooting 3K makes for a great 2K/1080p. Shooting 2K makes for a great 720p.

So while the frame size is a lot bigger on the 3K, the actual resolved detail won't be that much higher than 1080p. Of course, "1080p" means a lot of things; an HVX or 7D or GH1 only resolves a little more than 720p worth of detail anyway, so...

Barry_Green
12-02-2009, 10:10 AM
So in my case(event videographer, a zoom lens is a must)) Scarlet is far from cheap.
Until we know more, I would say that no event videographer should even be thinking that a Scarlet would be appropriate for them. Red is a Digital Cinema Camera Company (says so right on their logo); event videography is pretty much the epitome of "video", and the two aren't the same by any stretch.


Also HD zoom lenses are designed for 3 chips, do we even know that these lenses will fit into a single cheap camera like Scarlet???
I imagine there will be a B4 adapter... Red has a B4 to PL adapter for the Red One, at $3500.


If Sony produced PMW-350 with a single 2/3 CMOS as opposed to 3, how much cheaper would it be? -Is it even possible?
They could certainly do it, but don't expect them to. There's pretty much no such thing as a professional broadcast single-chip camera out there, for good reasons. Plus, they wouldn't do it with the existing chip they have, because it's a monochrome chip with no Bayer pattern, and the chip density isn't high enough to get 1080p good results with a single chip. They'd need at least a 3-megapixel chip to produce satisfactory 1080p with.

So -- they're not gonna do it.


Not:Yes you can argue that Scarlet has better functions like higher frame rates & little bit better codec & just a little bit more resolution, but aside from that remember it is after all a single chip camera...And the fixed version has a very limited optical zoom(8x not enough for me)
The Scarlet has better functions for digital cinema use. Not for videography. It's aimed at a different market.

We'll see if they've made strides towards video as more details are released, but the Red One isn't a video camera and I don't expect the Scarlet to be either. It'll at least have scaled 1080p recording, but in raw, and I don't think you want to be handing over hours of raw footage a day to your client, expecting them to go process it all through RedCine, etc.

adkimery
12-02-2009, 10:17 AM
a little better resolution?? 3k is a huge jump in resolution from HD.
The imager is 3k but because of things like how the Bayer pattern and OLPF (optical low pass filter to reduce aliasing) work you lose image information. I think Red One's 4k sensor resolves a bit over 3k worth of image detail. So using that as a guide Scarlet would resolve a bit over 2k. So, yes it's more than HD but it's not the massive leap that most people think it is.

Now, w/that being said no current HD camera can actually resolve a full HD image either so w/all things being equal the Scarlet should deliver a noticeably better looking HD image than what people are used to getting from their HD cameras (especially if we take codecs into consideration).


-A

EDIT: And Barry beat me to the punch.

Barry_Green
12-02-2009, 11:29 AM
Now, w/that being said no current HD camera can actually resolve a full HD image either so w/all things being equal the Scarlet should deliver a noticeably better looking HD image than what people are used to getting from their HD cameras (especially if we take codecs into consideration).
And I would dare say that you will see a huge jump in the HD quality image in terms of aliasing and artifacting; the Scarlet should deliver results that are pristine in comparison to DSLR footage.

Of course, there's "should" and there's "does", we'll have to wait to test the shipping version to see if it "does" deliver what it "should". As an ex-Red One owner, I'm pretty confident it will though.

ChipG
12-02-2009, 11:32 AM
Did you guys see the pic of the dslr like hand grip for the scarlet? Looks like it will be easier to hold.

killacam
12-02-2009, 12:55 PM
Did you guys see the pic of the dslr like hand grip for the scarlet? Looks like it will be easier to hold.

can you post a pic? I went looking for it and didn't see it but I did see what is supposed to be the new UI:
http://www.redgrabs.com/up/1259705913.jpg

purty nice.

ChipG
12-02-2009, 01:01 PM
You should probably resize that pic to 2.7 inches, the size of the lcd.

ethan cooper
12-02-2009, 01:09 PM
I resized it to 2.5" just for good measure. No worse than my current LCDs.

Brooksilver
12-02-2009, 01:23 PM
That UI looks badass.

Jason Ramsey
12-02-2009, 01:48 PM
I agree with Stephen.
A proper Scarlet cinema 2/3(interchangeable) camera can easily hit $10K without a prime lens kit. And if you want to add a HD zoom lens you are easily around $20K.
Sony PMW-350 will be sold for $22K that comes with Fujinon 16x HD lens. What is more it has 3x 2/3 CMOS chips, as opposed to 1 CMOS Red Scarlet.
So in my case(event videographer, a zoom lens is a must)) Scarlet is far from cheap.
Also HD zoom lenses are designed for 3 chips, do we even know that these lenses will fit into a single cheap camera like Scarlet???

Here is the $Million question:
If Sony produced PMW-350 with a single 2/3 CMOS as opposed to 3, how much cheaper would it be? -Is it even possible?{ Cause if it is, expect Sony to come up with one before RED.}

Not:Yes you can argue that Scarlet has better functions like higher frame rates & little bit better codec & just a little bit more resolution, but aside from that remember it is after all a single chip camera...And the fixed version has a very limited optical zoom(8x not enough for me)

I configured a pretty proper Scarlet WITH 4 prime lenses for around 10k.

At any rate... let's try to get a bit more specific with this...

That camera has two versions. With a lens for 22,000 and without for 20,500. So, how much is that lens if you were to buy it (or it's copmarable model) individually. According to that price it is 1,500.

Anyways. Let's configure a real decked out scarlet that should be more than comparable to the i/o's and functionality of the pmw-350.
2750 for the Brain.
300 for a rear module adapter
1250 for a Battery Module
950 for a dual cf rear module
pro i/o module 2950

Right now, we're at 8200. We've got a very comparable system less lens and viewing of some sort.

Now, the 350 doesn't come with a battery. We've got at least two with the above configuration of the Scarlet, so let's keep that in mind as well.

So, we need viewing. pmw-350 uses a 3.5" LCD derived from the ex1/ex3 at 640x480 resolution.

So, how about a 5" 720p touchscreen LCD for the scarlet as a nice substitution? that's 1600.

Now, we're at 9800. Let's go ahead and add a wireless redmote as well. 10,300.

So, how much is that lens that comes with the 350? according to the price differences in the two models offered it's around 1500... At any rate, you've got up to 12 grand you can use towards glass before you get to the price point of the 350.

So, what's different still? (these are obviously going to be 2 very different systems). Well, it's not the Scarlet that doesn't have a tripod adapter. It's the 350. no power supply, either.

Tripod adapter is 221 bucks. a/c adapter/charger is 721. Or, if we wanted a stand-alone charger, we could spend upwards of 1400 - 1700 bucks on one in their list of accessories. They also have a "remote control" unit, that sounds like it would be comparable to the redmote if we wanted to add that. no price.

Now, we can call the 221 for the tripod adapter a wash if we want since scarlet doesn't have a shoulder pad or anything that comes with it. Or, add it and also factor in the cost of a shoulder mount system for the Scarlet.

But, since Scarlet comes with a couple of Batteries, we should also add at least one battery to the 350. There are a few different options for the Sony that range from 618 to 670 bucks. So, we better add that to the cost of the Sony at least.

And, on and on, and on. Point is... You're still going to have to add stuff to the Sony and it's not going to be 22.5k either. Likely at least a few thousand dollars more.

You can take the above configured 10,000 dollar scarlet.... let's just boost it up to 12, grand for arguments sake. any other bells and whistles you want to add... a n expensive 1,000 shoulder mount (but don't forget to then add the tripod adapter to the sony) and a side handle (for another way to control the camera) for example.

We have 10.5 grand to add for lens(es) to the Scarlet still. Do that with your choice... I'm sure you can get a comparable zoom to the one on the sony, plus an entire set of primes and maybe be around the 22.5k mark, or likely less. I'm honestly not sure the rate of a comparable 2/3" fujinon, so I' won't speculate too much on that. Still might want to factor in the added cost of batteries/charger/etc that you will need for the Sony... But, we'll leave that off the list for now and just pretend that you can get a fully working camera for 22.5 with everything you needed.

Anyways... Point is... You now have two VERY different systems that are comparably priced. I see a lot of potential for a variety of glass with the Scarlet to get to that price point though. I also see a llot of potential advantages/disadvantages to each system depending on the person using them and their needs for them.

3k (roughly 2.3K of resolved detail is what it sounds like) RAW at up to REDCODE 100 with a set of 5 very fast prime lenses, and a zoom lens vs. MPEG2 @ 35Mbps(?) 1920 x 1080p. 150fps vs. 60, and a zoom lens, and a whole lot of other differences that would work for some and against others.

Since, we've added a side handle as well as the redmote to the SCarlet, we could also add a side cf module and then have the ability to take it anwhere from compact dslr type configuration to full on shoulder mount config. the pmw350 is stricly shoulder mount, tripod.

Anyways. I'm not trying to say that one is going to be better than the other. Well, one will be for one person, another for another, and so on and so forth.

But, you have to work pretty hard to get up to the base price of the pmw-350 and that's before you've added battery, tripod adapter, charger of some sort, etc to the 350.

And, when you do get two systems that are pretty comparable, they are still very, very different systems that can't be directly compared very easily. All the way down to the way the image is handled off the sensor block. One way isn't necessarily inherently better than the other. And, it's not going to be as simple as you suggest as Sony just taking away 2 of the cmos chips from that set up. Very, very different.

later,
Jason

yoclay
12-02-2009, 03:35 PM
And I would dare say that you will see a huge jump in the HD quality image in terms of aliasing and artifacting; the Scarlet should deliver results that are pristine in comparison to DSLR footage.

Of course, there's "should" and there's "does", we'll have to wait to test the shipping version to see if it "does" deliver what it "should". As an ex-Red One owner, I'm pretty confident it will though.


This is the big sell for me. However, no one is talking about the supposedly hybrid aspect of these cameras yet.

When I shoot fashion, I don't get to choose the clothes. The stylist does. If they want to do a polka dot or a stripe story, or make it all about sequins, I'm in trouble.

Why?

Because the future of fashion is moving images. There is a growing expectation that we will do both. The role of the photographer is changing. He or she is now an "image-maker" Multimedia is the future. Videographers/broadcasters may actually become photographers in a bizarre case of reverse engineering. Now we know that these are different sensibilities, but they are merging. Cameras are leading the way.

Canon knows this too. They will have to improve the issue surrounding artifacts.

RED of course knows this too. Scarlet is pointed this way (towards photographers and image-makers) and I think the S35 and FF35 have been delayed partially because it is so hard to get a lay of the land on the photo side, not the video aspect. Epic is easy it's pointed towards cinematographers. Scarlet is definitely where things get tricky.

Right now Phase One already has a 65Mp back.

How on earth can RED keep up with that? Hybrid won't hold water for them if the resolution is too low by the time the larger sensors come out. Instant obsolesence.
How do you balance that with an anti-aliasing filter? Very difficult. Only speed and better image processing can overcome this difficulty, which is definitely in RED's favor.

I wouldn't be surprised however, if they eventually scrap the hybrid battle completely in the smaller cameras, and just hand that over to their 645 camera. The problem is that the S35 and FF35 have a medium format form factor. It can't compete with the DSLR's on this front. The natural evolution for a RED hybrid is therefore 645. If that camera can also shoot video with a HUGE sensor, they are all alone with the wind at their backs. Give it fast cinema lenses, which no one else produces and you will have a lot of fashion/commercial people and the right kind of market for RED.

So the theory goes.

Barry_Green
12-02-2009, 03:55 PM
How on earth can RED keep up with that? Hybrid won't hold water for them if the resolution is too low by the time the larger sensors come out. Instant obsolesence.
Well, if the Red was using a 3mp sensor, I'd agree. But even the 2/3" sensor is 6 megapixel, and the FF version (which is what I would assume a true "hybrid" shooter would want, right?) should have 6K mode, IIRC... which would mean somewhere around 21+ megapixels, so it shouldn't be too bad at all when it comes to stills performance. The 1D Mark IV is about 18 megapixels, isn't it? Not saying the Red will equal it, but saying that at least the raw resolution should be comparable with a decent stills camera.


How do you balance that with an anti-aliasing filter? Very difficult.
Not for Red though, because they use the same AA for stills and video. So there's no trickly line to dance. They get mediocre stills out of the smaller chips (if you think 6-megapixel stills would qualify as mediocre) but as the chips get bigger, the stills performance catches up. Red's unique in that they don't sacrifice video performance to optimize still performance.

yoclay
12-02-2009, 04:13 PM
I totally agree Barry, but the form factor is a problem. The natural evolution will be to 645 for the camera if it stays in this hybrid market. Most fashion guys shoot 35 because of the form factor. If they have to have a box that handles like a medium format camera, then they want the more megapixels that go with it.

Journalists will not be using the scarlet out in the field, too cumbersome and complex. The DSLR's have the advantage there. This is why Canon specifically mentioned the 5D was for journalists. Thus hybrid for RED is for a different animal. Someone commercial or fashion for instance. Yet why shoot 21Mp stills when with the same form factor when you can do 65Mp? More suitable for advertising/billboard. However if I am paying $30,000 for a back, I would definitely take a 45MP one that shoots video. Rental houses then would have two potential revenue streams.

I wouldn't be surprised if Phase One isn't already working on something.

Mark my words. Hybrid is going Medium format.

ChipG
12-02-2009, 04:37 PM
I resized it to 2.5" just for good measure. No worse than my current LCDs.

Is this correct? What you posted sure looks about the size of an hvx200 lcd which is 3.5 inches not 2.5 inches.

Luis Caffesse
12-02-2009, 04:48 PM
Is this correct? What you posted sure looks about the size of an hvx200 lcd which is 3.5 inches not 2.5 inches.

Yeah - that seemed a bit too large to me as well -
I tried resizing the same pic in photoshop to a 2.8" diagonal, and this is what I got:

http://www.pitchproductions.com/pics/REDlcd.jpg

Stephen Mick
12-02-2009, 04:51 PM
Just throw a Z-Finder on there and all will be well. :D

ChipG
12-02-2009, 05:20 PM
Just throw a Z-Finder on there and all will be well. :D

All the stuff your going to have to throw on it cost money and adds to the size and weight.

Guess I found a use for my virtual reality gogles I have never used.

Duke M.
12-02-2009, 06:45 PM
Did anyone else notice that there were price changes in the announcement over night?

Redmote from $500 to $550
2.8" LCD from $800 to $900
Battery module when from $1,000-$1,700 to $1,250

Jason Ramsey
12-02-2009, 08:28 PM
it reverted to the prices they announced during the october 30th announcement.

Joe Media
12-02-2009, 09:37 PM
Is it just me or are all the so called "announcements" from Red getting a bit ridiculous? Lets have an announcement about an upcoming announcement to announce proposed release dates. I'm not trying to bash Red (I still rent the R1 quite often) but come on. I've been following Red every day for the past 2 years and literally read every post. These guys shift their story every month. First it's a delay due to the economy, then there is a halt on releasing news because of the "competition" and now they state that they are transparent with their development but they have cryptic specs and still no test footage. I would be willing to bet that they won't deliver a camera before 2011 and when it does deliver, it won't have the proposed specs we see today. Are you listening Canon? Put the 5d sensor in a ENG rig with real ergo and IO and I'm sure you'd make a killing. Panasonic? Refine the GH1 sensor and put it in a real rig. I'm sure most of us would be willing to deal with the workflow and issues of these sensors if we could just BUY them today. I for one would buy it. Forgive the rant...this is just my 2 cents.

yoclay
12-03-2009, 12:29 AM
I'm pretty skeptical that we will see S35 in June. At least a full year out in my opinion. FF35? Who knows?

VGurcu
12-03-2009, 01:26 AM
Until we know more, I would say that no event videographer should even be thinking that a Scarlet would be appropriate for them.

Well not that I don't know that, I guess mine was wishful(and theoretical) thinking... ( Thanks for answering my other questions btw regarding Sony.) This leaves us (for the pro videographer(events, ENG, corp) who wants an affordable bigger sensor camcorder) with pure Canon speculation, check this one out:
http://www.hdwarrior.co.uk/2009/12/02/are-canon-working-on-a-dslr-based-video-camera/


But don't short change it and undersell its huge advantages in some attempt to prove your point.
For a filmmaker Scarlet offers great value, no doubt. My post was subjective depending on 'my' needs... I have a right to undersell it to myself ;)


So, how much is that lens that comes with the 350? according to the price differences in the two models offered it's around 1500... At any rate, you've got up to 12 grand you can use towards glass before you get to the price point of the 350.
Jason, you did go the extra mile to put 2 very different packages together.
Mine would be a bit different but you got it pretty close (for one EVF is indispensable for me, and the Bomb EVF is around 3K itself)
Anyway I just want to point out that the value of Fuji lens is not $1500, as you already know; you cant find that model to purchase it separete to start with. I never understood the idea behind selling "body-only" option almost same as with the lens option. Cheapest HD glass similar to one that comes with Sony 350 is a $10K Canon, next I could find a $12K Fujinon...

And, when you do get two systems that are pretty comparable, they are still very, very different systems that can't be directly compared very easily. All the way down to the way the image is handled off the sensor block. One way isn't necessarily inherently better than the other. And, it's not going to be as simple as you suggest as Sony just taking away 2 of the cmos chips from that set up. Very, very different.

I did compare the 2 not to find the 'better one' nor the 'exact cheaper one', but to point out that it is not that cheap after all specifically if you wanted to set up a Scarlet system for ENG, ,events & other videography jobs.
As Barry pointed out already Scarlet is not primarily for such purposes, hence my argument is irrelevant. But then, perhaps when one claims that "Scarlet is dirt cheap" they should state that for 'cinematographic* purposes'...
*for lack of a better word

dcloud
12-03-2009, 01:50 AM
Well, if the Red was using a 3mp sensor, I'd agree. But even the 2/3" sensor is 6 megapixel, and the FF version (which is what I would assume a true "hybrid" shooter would want, right?) should have 6K mode, IIRC... which would mean somewhere around 21+ megapixels, so it shouldn't be too bad at all when it comes to stills performance. The 1D Mark IV is about 18 megapixels, isn't it? Not saying the Red will equal it, but saying that at least the raw resolution should be comparable with a decent stills camera.
why the hell would i use the red for stills? im not paying 7k+ just to use it for stills. id get a real still cam with features that are useful

same reason i wouldnt get a 5d mkII for cinema purposes.

yoclay
12-03-2009, 05:05 AM
why the hell would i use the red for stills? im not paying 7k+ just to use it for stills. id get a real still cam with features that are useful

same reason i wouldnt get a 5d mkII for cinema purposes.


http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/icons/icon1.gif
As I tried to say before, I honestly think the form factor of a hybrid RED video camera lends itself more towards medium format captors. The increased Megapixels would be more interesting from a stills point of view. That's a hybrid that would make sense. I don't think RED could compete with the 35mm DSLR's and would be better suited to go down this road with the option of a crop for 35 Pl lenses as well as the 645 lenses they say they will produce.

Just saw this today at Cinema5D news:

possible 35 x 35 sensor 30Mp Canon 1Ds around the corner

It probably won't be long before people are trying to shoot films with their Hasselblad lenses too...

ethan cooper
12-03-2009, 06:14 AM
Is this correct? What you posted sure looks about the size of an hvx200 lcd which is 3.5 inches not 2.5 inches.

I didn't size to diagonal, so no, it wasn't quite right.

Oh and lets pray to god it's better than the HVX lcd. Good camera, terrible screen.

Barry_Green
12-03-2009, 10:27 AM
why the hell would i use the red for stills?
I have no idea. But Red believes that it would be appropriate for stills, hence the whole DSMC marketing.

I don't get the whole "convergence" thing, I'd much rather have a dedicated purpose product. In my lobbying to Panasonic and Canon for large-sensor dedicated video cameras, I've flat-out told 'em I don't care whatsoever, nor do I know anyone who cares whatsoever, if it shoots stills or not. If it's a bonus that doesn't hurt anything, okay, throw it in, but if it compromises the video functionality in any way whatsoever, I don't want it, and I wouldn't pay $5 more for it.

Convergence is great on my cell phone, I love that I've got a flashlight, web browser, still camera, video camera, e-mail tool, GPS turn-by-turn navigation system, voice recorder, note-taker, calendar, and everything else all-in-one, with me at all times. But would I actually want to use it for those purposes, instead of a dedicated tool? Of course not! :) You know, it really is like the Swiss Army Knife -- who among us, when needing to tighten down a screw, would prefer a Swiss Army Knife over an actual screwdriver? Who among us, when needing to saw a board, would prefer to use the Swiss Army Knife saw instead of a real hand saw?

Could you build a house, using only a Swiss Army Knife instead of regular tools? You know, I bet someone actually could. Should they? Or, maybe the better question -- would they want to do it twice?!?


id get a real still cam with features that are useful
Agreed 1,000%


same reason i wouldnt get a 5d mkII for cinema purposes.
Agreed 100%.

However, with the 7D, I think that the price tag is so low that it does warrant consideration as a digi-cine rig for the lowest-budget folks. Price tag is a huge component in the SLR's appeal.

Jason Ramsey
12-03-2009, 01:08 PM
I did compare the 2 not to find the 'better one' nor the 'exact cheaper one', but to point out that it is not that cheap after all specifically if you wanted to set up a Scarlet system for ENG, ,events & other videography jobs.
As Barry pointed out already Scarlet is not primarily for such purposes, hence my argument is irrelevant. But then, perhaps when one claims that "Scarlet is dirt cheap" they should state that for 'cinematographic* purposes'...
*for lack of a better word

To contrast that potentially 20,000 dollar rig, you can indeed get a fully functional with most everything you need Scarlet for 4-5k as well... Again, this is not for everyone, but that's kinda the beauty of the system (for me). For someone looking for the absolute best, (closest thing to) no-compromise, image quality they can get for the money, to be able to spend 5 grand, pick up a fixed scarlet and have a dslr handheld style (at the very least) setup, complete with viewing, side handle, redmote, batteries, charger, etc. I just don't see anything (right now) really touching the likely (yes, yes, I know.. it's not out yet, etc... But, I know enough to be pretty dang certain...) quality and robustness of motion images that will be coming off of it anywhere in the neighborhood of that price point. Beyond that, add only what you need for your set up... For a cinema setup... beyond perhaps a more stable hand held setup, you don't really *need* to add anything beyond that. You've got the mic inputs on the brain, and a relatively inexpensive adapter will allow you to use xlr if you need that.

Point being.... If overall image quality and robustness for your money is of a primary concern (as is one of the primary ones for me), your 4,000 dollar scarlet is going to give you the exact same image quality as your 20+k Scarlet. You also have the potential luxury of building an even more robust system over time by adding additional modules, etc. vs. dropping 10k or 20k all at once. Not everyone grooves with that type of option. It's a nice selling point for me though. Particularly being able to carry those on with me to another future brain as a possible option as well.

Now, while Scarlet might not be geared towards eng use, I can think of a couple of industry professionals who do a lot of eng work (with RED One even) who are planning on the fixed scarlet and/or the interchangeable model, for exactly those kinds of uses. Not that it is ideally suited for that purpose, but certainly doesn't mean that it can't/won't be used effectively for that. Same goes for that Sony cam as I'm sure it will also be used on film projects as well, even though that may not be it's primary focus, and it will likely be used effectively in that manner as well. But, these are things that I personally like. I would (hopefully) have a very robust, fantastic image, and be able to build multiple different setups and configurations to suit it better for different types of uses when needed or desired.

dadoboy
12-03-2009, 03:08 PM
The fact that the 2/3" "cinema" Scarlet offers geared prime lenses at the outset makes it markedly different from anything out there. It's such an unusual package at an unusual price point.

My one concern with the 2/3" is that even experienced directors/producers are stuck on the idea that 35mm sensors/DOF properties are always going to be better. It will be a harder sell talking tech with them - try and explain that at T1.4 the DOF will be the same as... their eyes will glaze over. So they'll be looking for gear like the s35 and EPIC and even the HDSLRs over the 2/3" if they don't know any better.

Barry_Green
12-03-2009, 03:35 PM
1.5 on the Scarlet will be about the same as F/4 on a 35mm sensor. The fixed Scarlet's 2.8 is about the same as 8.0 on the 7D. So it's not going to be easy to match what a 35mm sized frame can do.

HHL
12-03-2009, 03:45 PM
1.5 on the Scarlet will be about the same as F/4 on a 35mm sensor. The fixed Scarlet's 2.8 is about the same as 8.0 on the 7D. So it's not going to be easy to match what a 35mm sized frame can do.


Thanks for those calculations Barry. Just real quick: This means that....1. The depth of field will be "longer"....and 2. It's low light abilities will be less capable. ...or am I jumping to conclusions?

Jason Ramsey
12-03-2009, 03:47 PM
1.5 on the Scarlet will be about the same as F/4 on a 35mm sensor. The fixed Scarlet's 2.8 is about the same as 8.0 on the 7D. So it's not going to be easy to match what a 35mm sized frame can do.

fixed is t2.6. f2.4 according to Jarred.

Later,
jason

Jason Ramsey
12-03-2009, 03:59 PM
Thanks for those calculations Barry. Just real quick: This means that....1. The depth of field will be "longer"....and 2. It's low light abilities will be less capable. ...or am I jumping to conclusions?

it means, that at the same relative field of view it would have the same DoF as a 35mm at around f4.

David Mullen says 2.5 stops a lot when referring to the difference of 2/3" compared to 35 sensor size. Barry states 2.75 in a recent article of his.

So, anyways around there. Between 2.5 and 2.75 stops difference.

David also stated here (http://reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=517969&postcount=5):

So if the zoom on the fixed-lens Scarlet is set to roughly f/2.8, then that would be like shooting S35 at an f/5.8-8.0 split.

Since Jarred says the Scarlet Fixed lens is F2.4, it shouldn't be quite as much. Maybe a straight up f5.8

T1.5 (mini primes)... Wonder what that would be rated in terms of F stop... maybe 1.2-1.4. So perhaps equivalent to between 2.8 - 4.0 depending on whether you go 2.5 or 2.75 for your calculation at the same field of view on S35..

HHL
12-03-2009, 04:01 PM
I only ask....or mention, because, I was completely blown away by the EOS-1D Mark IV video, "Nocturne"....specifically because of it's low light abilities. It was ALL incidental light, except for the "balloon/girl" shot, (he used a reflector)....

I'm CERTAINLY NOT "anti-Scarlet"....I hope to buy one in the next 2 years? But, low light shooting capacity figures into the equation IMHO more and more....I'm just saying....

David G. Smith
12-03-2009, 04:23 PM
I only ask....or mention, because, I was completely blown away by the EOS-1D Mark IV video, "Nocturne"....specifically because of it's low light abilities. It was ALL incidental light, except for the "balloon/girl" shot, (he used a reflector)....

I'm CERTAINLY NOT "anti-Scarlet"....I hope to buy one in the next 2 years? But, low light shooting capacity figures into the equation IMHO more and more....I'm just saying....


I was wondering when the question of the low light capability would come up. I saw the render of the Scarlet LCD screen, and correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't it say, "500 ISO"? So what is the story on the 2/3" Scarlet sensor sensitivity? Are those specs available at this time? Is that "500 ISO" a "Render issue"?

Jason Ramsey
12-03-2009, 04:33 PM
we don't have those specs yet for the Scarlet 2/3" sensor.

We know that EPIC will have an ISO Range of 200 - 8000. and, we know that Jim said "800 is the new 320". Meaning, he believed the 5k Mysterium X sensor at ISO 800 to have equivalent performance to the RED One Mysterium sensor at ISO 320. And, that that is the same sensor that will be going in the S35 Scarlet, so it would likely be the same as the Epic S35 and Epic X in that regard.

Now, Scarlet 2/3" is also the 2nd generation MysteriumX sensor, but it is not the same sensor as the one that the above information/specs were provide for

Scarlet being a 2/3" 3k Mysterium X sensor. We don't have any information on its performance yet, though.

HHL
12-03-2009, 04:33 PM
Between 2.5 and 2.75 stops difference.



Thanks Jason. Much appreciated. :)

OUCH!!! 2.75 stops hurts.....I'm aware that with the "Redcode" codec/RAW....some of this MAY be remedied in post, but....2.75....OUCH!!! (That hurts)

From what I've seen so far from Red Camera Company, this product will be break-through....I'll be surprised if it isn't.

Deploy time is obviously their "Achilles Heel"....I don't think it's unjustified, ...just annoying to everyone. But....no doubt, I'll be looking forward to the Barry Green tests on the upcoming Red Camera(s). I'm also looking forward to the footy from other DVXUsers. I try to help out the community when I can, but sometimes it's nice to wait and see what DVXUsers experience with a new product.

Low light shooting ability, (or lack thereof)
Redcode Color-correction, (exactly how sick it gets)
Shot flexibility with the fixed lens Scarlet, (it doesn't have to shoot "shallow"....but we'll see how pleasing the images are)

....we already know the price category it will fall into has necessitated a recalibration of strategy for micro-budget shooters. (Is it really worth 3 7d bodies?) Exactly HOW SICK WILL THE FOOTY LOOK? I know it depends on who is "weilding" it, but...again....we'll see if the final image and cost MATCH the necessary sacrifice to obtain one.

As a final thought....I saw an online video that was posted for "the Sexiest Woman Alive" from "Esquire Magazine." The RedUsers were spouting off about this video....(not the girl...the footage). To be honest I was VERY UNIMPRESSED. I am FULLY AWARE that if we shot this some video on a 7d and projected it up on a theater screen....we would INDEED SEE the "power" of Red.....but....online.....I couldn't tell ANY DIFFERENCE WHAT-SO-EVER. Please don't try to explain "why" that is....I KNOW "why"....but does "why" matter? Most of us are posting vids online, so....we'll have to see if it is actually worth it to spend 3x the cost to gain 5% improvement (if at all) WHEN POSTING VIDS ONLINE.

I would love NOTHING MORE than having to shell out 20K for 2 Scarlets because the footy is so INSANELY beautiful that I lose my mind and MUST BUY...not ONE BUT TWO! :)

I'm actually expecting that it will have weaknesses like every other camera....but, we'll see.

Jason Ramsey
12-03-2009, 05:04 PM
OUCH!!! 2.75 stops hurts.....I'm aware that with the "Redcode" codec/RAW....some of this MAY be remedied in post, but....2.75....OUCH!!! (That hurts)

It can be, depending on what you are doing. If you are wanting 35mm dof, then you are probably shooting a movie. There is a wide range of shots in movies, and they aren't mostly running around with their lens wide open in all those shots. A good many of the shots are likely to be at f4 or f5.6 anyways. With a fixed scarlet, the difference would be filming with your lens wide open to get that same look (adjusting your lighting, iso, etc for proper exposure of course). On a Cinema Scarlet, you would be a stop closed from open or so.

The crop factor difference between 2/3" and S35 is 2.5x. So, 30mm on Scarlet will give you the same FOV as 75mm on S35. To get the same Depth of Field at that FoV, if the 35 camera is at 5.8, then you are at f2.4.

at 30mm on a Scarlet, if you were 10 feet away from the subject, your Depth of Field would be roughly 3.45 fee. The amount of area that is in focus..Distance from the lens (if you are going for 10 feet) that your subject would be in what would be considered "acceptable focus" would be 8.5 - 12 feet from the focal plane..

At 50mm it's like 1 foot.

At 6mm on the 2/3" Scarlet, your DoF is infinite. If you take the equivalent FoV for S35, that would be 15mm. From f3.2 and slower on the 15mm lens. is infinite as well. At f2.8 (on the S35 15mm) it's 208ft.

Or, so says the calculator :)

Ltaer,
Jaosn

HHL
12-03-2009, 05:19 PM
Thanks again Jason. Much appreciated. I'm NOT addicted to shallow DOF. It has its place, but it is over used more and more. :( So, I'm not worried about that (DOF) as much as I am its low light abilities. (Thanks for the perspective on that as well....we'll have to see what this new chip can do...) IMHO lighting is where the REAL difference is, as far as cinematography goes....(story telling is the REAL difference as far as movie making goes).

So....the light capabilities of a camera is where MAJOR ground can be gained by an indie film maker (IMHO).

Someone on Reduser had a great approach/idea as far as cost/investment in Scarlet....they said they'd buy one fixed lens, and one scarlet body (interchangeable lens version) This way, they'd get the "discount" from the accessories that some WITH the fixed lens....and have the flexibility of the interchangeable Scarlet. I need to crunch some numbers, but I think they're right. I'm also certain that, (with the interchangable scarlet), and a fast mini-prime, I'll have a shallow enough DOF if I need it. That being said....

Low-light capability remains to be seen.

Am I the only one who doens't worry so much about NOT being able to get a usable shot because of lack of light anymore? I don't know if I can go back to worrying about that so much. I actually bought an LED light to help my lighting in certain situations....DANG! That thing is awesome! ....once again.....I'm not sure if I can go back to worrying about lighting up an ENTIRE FREAKING CITY BLOCK to do an interview? (ok....I'm exaggerating, but you know what I mean)

Thanks again Jason!

Jason Ramsey
12-03-2009, 05:27 PM
So....the light capabilities of a camera is where MAJOR ground can be gained by an indie film maker (IMHO).

I (personally) am more concerned with how clean the image is across its range vs. "how low can it go". Though, I know low light is going to be a very important factor for some folks. It'll be interesting to see how well the 2/3" Scarlet's perform in that situation.


.they said they'd buy one fixed lens, and one scarlet body (interchangeable lens version) This way, they'd get the "discount" from the accessories that some WITH the fixed lens....and have the flexibility of the interchangeable Scarlet

I think if you want a zoom lens and primes, that's definitely probably the most affordable way to go and get quality glass (of course, we don't know exactly what the quality will be yet) for your money. No point in spending 10 grand on a zoom lens for the interchangeable Scarlet (and possibly a different lens mount) when you can just buy the fixed Scarlet instead (of a 10 grand zoom lens) for 4750 and (like you said) have the basic modules to go with it.

EDIT: Or pick up the fixed Scarlet first. Then, down the line as you want to start building a set of prime glass, pick up the interchangeable brain for 2750 and start getting some primes.

HHL
12-03-2009, 05:41 PM
EDIT: Or pick up the fixed Scarlet first. Then, down the line as you want to start building a set of prime glass, pick up the interchangeable brain for 2750 and start getting some primes.


MY PLAN EXACTLY!

To be honest, we are some seriously SPOILED BUGGARS. I cannot BELIEVE the pricepoint and quality that we hold in our hands TODAY. I'm sure you are as excited as I am with the new dimension that Red has brought to this ALREADY AMAZING FREAKING PARTY....I know it hasn't come out yet, ....but I also know THAT IT WILL. And I honestly don't even care what happens....because Nikon (lazy punks), Canon (Belle of the party), and Panasonic (fix that codec please!), Sony (HELLO?)....MUST give due diligence to the happenings at Red. I think (IMHO) that they have, albeit cautiously, given more attention to the "cinematic" imaging products, than just PURE VIDEO, ....than we could have hoped for. To be honest, I could handle NO IMPROVEMENTS for the next 2 years and be just fine, (I'm the bottle-neck, my lack of expertise and experience, is the problem...NOT MY CAMERA)....

...HOW COOL IS IT THAT the next 2 years is looking like a foot-race between the Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, and Red! Wooohoooooo!!!! We are spoiled BUGGARS!

killacam
12-03-2009, 07:48 PM
Thanks Jason. Much appreciated. :)

OUCH!!! 2.75 stops hurts.....I'm aware that with the "Redcode" codec/RAW....some of this MAY be remedied in post, but....2.75....OUCH!!! (That hurts)

From what I've seen so far from Red Camera Company, this product will be break-through....I'll be surprised if it isn't.

Deploy time is obviously their "Achilles Heel"....I don't think it's unjustified, ...just annoying to everyone. But....no doubt, I'll be looking forward to the Barry Green tests on the upcoming Red Camera(s). I'm also looking forward to the footy from other DVXUsers. I try to help out the community when I can, but sometimes it's nice to wait and see what DVXUsers experience with a new product.

Low light shooting ability, (or lack thereof)
Redcode Color-correction, (exactly how sick it gets)
Shot flexibility with the fixed lens Scarlet, (it doesn't have to shoot "shallow"....but we'll see how pleasing the images are)

....we already know the price category it will fall into has necessitated a recalibration of strategy for micro-budget shooters. (Is it really worth 3 7d bodies?) Exactly HOW SICK WILL THE FOOTY LOOK? I know it depends on who is "weilding" it, but...again....we'll see if the final image and cost MATCH the necessary sacrifice to obtain one.

As a final thought....I saw an online video that was posted for "the Sexiest Woman Alive" from "Esquire Magazine." The RedUsers were spouting off about this video....(not the girl...the footage). To be honest I was VERY UNIMPRESSED. I am FULLY AWARE that if we shot this some video on a 7d and projected it up on a theater screen....we would INDEED SEE the "power" of Red.....but....online.....I couldn't tell ANY DIFFERENCE WHAT-SO-EVER. Please don't try to explain "why" that is....I KNOW "why"....but does "why" matter? Most of us are posting vids online, so....we'll have to see if it is actually worth it to spend 3x the cost to gain 5% improvement (if at all) WHEN POSTING VIDS ONLINE.

I would love NOTHING MORE than having to shell out 20K for 2 Scarlets because the footy is so INSANELY beautiful that I lose my mind and MUST BUY...not ONE BUT TWO! :)

I'm actually expecting that it will have weaknesses like every other camera....but, we'll see.

wait, I'm pretty sure the 2.5 stops only refers to the DOF difference and not the low light sensitivity. There's not always an exact relationship between the two. The 1DmarkIV is supposed to have much better light sensitivity than the 5D and yet it has a slightly more cropped sensor (1.2x or whatever it is). The Scarlet might have one thing going for it in that is has to deal with less pixels than a DSLR, making the photosites larger but who knows what the actual result will be.

As far as that "Sexiest Woman" video, was that the Megan Fox one? I don't think a lot of people were impressed. At least I wasn't. I wasn't too impressed with Camille's 5D Ralph Lauren videos either though. Someone made a comment that I thought was funny that they thought those two videos seemed like someone posting their "Hey, check out my new 35mm adapter!" videos.

Pietro Impagliazzo
12-03-2009, 08:04 PM
why the hell would i use the red for stills? im not paying 7k+ just to use it for stills. id get a real still cam with features that are useful

same reason i wouldnt get a 5d mkII for cinema purposes.

How many times most of us had the frustration of taking a frame grab from a HD camera and realizing how crappy it really is?

I think that's not the right way to look at it.

The right way would be: RED video capabilities are so good that you can just use a frame as a still photo, specially on the S35 versions.

2/3" Scarlet would do for ok photos.

David G. Smith
12-03-2009, 09:12 PM
As far as that "Sexiest Woman" video, was that the Megan Fox one? I don't think a lot of people were impressed. At least I wasn't. I wasn't too impressed with Camille's 5D Ralph Lauren videos either though. Someone made a comment that I thought was funny that they thought those two videos seemed like someone posting their "Hey, check out my new 35mm adapter!" videos.

Wasn't the "Sexiest Woman" Kate Beckinsale? I think that is definitely a case of "Content" over technique! :2vrolijk_08:

philiplipetz
12-03-2009, 10:42 PM
I (personally) am more concerned with how clean the image is across its range vs. "how low can it go".

I just came back from an Indie film festival and the difference between the DSLR flims and the Red films was not subtle. Let's ignore moire, Jason put his finger on the thing that was most obvious. The DSLR films suffered whenever the lighting was less than optimal, shadow etc., but with the Red films there was much less color breakup and much cleaner images throughout the range. I found myself wondering if a clean image was really much more important than shallow DOF. To my eye the answer is yes. I think that the eye is drawn naturally to distortion so get rid of that before you can optimize the image.

After viewing both DSLR and Red films in the same night, I now wonder if those of us on the lower end of the DSLR bandwagon might end up changing ships to favor clean images over shallow DOF. With our budget, and today's technology, we can have one or the other, but not both.

Luis Caffesse
12-03-2009, 10:45 PM
...the difference between the DSLR flims and the Red films was not subtle.
Sounds like you're being very diplomatic about it.
:)

Jason Ramsey
12-03-2009, 11:40 PM
As far as that "Sexiest Woman" video, was that the Megan Fox one?

I believe it was Kate Beckinsale. Shot on RED One hardware with a 5K MysteriumX Sensor inside. I think at 4.5K

killacam
12-03-2009, 11:56 PM
yeah, I just checked it out now- sweet video (and I'm not exactly talking about the camera). I got distracted somehow from pixel peeping. cool that it's maybe the first major video shot with the mysterium x though. and lucky guy dvxuser.com founder jarred land is- he got to be ASSistant cameraman

David G. Smith
12-04-2009, 12:27 AM
Yeah Jarred had pretty sweet gig.

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/video/who-is-the-sexiest-woman-alive-2009?bcpid=37869959001&bctid=44001628001

Luis Caffesse
12-04-2009, 12:32 AM
Yeah Jarred had pretty sweet gig.

had?
:)

David G. Smith
12-04-2009, 12:44 AM
had?
:)

Well, it ain't everyday you get to shoot Kate Beckinsale! :cry:

Luis Caffesse
12-04-2009, 12:45 AM
Well, it ain't everyday you get to shoot Kate Beckinsale! :cry:

But it is everyday he gets to work with the Scarlet and Epic prototypes....
(hence my questioning of the past tense)

:)

Peter Mosiman
12-04-2009, 01:46 AM
I cant confirm but over on scarlet user they are saying it has the tripod mounts on the bottom


the fixed scarlet is smaller than a canon hfs10 ? or similiar size if so no thanks .. i like the idea of having the red one size just cheaper

The idea of a "glove" or another organic way of controlling the cam is crazy and I love it would be awesome to see the director ..

standing there waving his arms like a conductor of a symphony because in many ways he is ..
:grin::grin:

I don't understand why you'd want to have a camera the size of the REDONE. its frickin massive and heavy (especially after a long day of HH). :kali::shocked:

Then again, the weight does help with the steadyness of the shots.

__
Peter Mosiman
pmosiman@bluelightproject.com

philiplipetz
12-04-2009, 07:07 AM
I don't understand why you'd want to have a camera the size of the REDONE. its frickin massive and heavy (especially after a long day of HH). :kali::shocked:

Then again, the weight does help with the steadyness of the shots.

__
Peter Mosiman
pmosiman@bluelightproject.com

I was talking to a DP who owns a RedOne. He showed me great, wonderful, shots that he took in the desert. I asked how he got his rig there. He told me that his backback with camera and accessories was about 65 lbs (30Kg). Not sure if that included water and cooling packs.

HHL
12-04-2009, 10:08 AM
wait, I'm pretty sure the 2.5 stops only refers to the DOF difference and not the low light sensitivity. There's not always an exact relationship between the two. The 1DmarkIV is supposed to have much better light sensitivity than the 5D and yet it has a slightly more cropped sensor (1.2x or whatever it is). The Scarlet might have one thing going for it in that is has to deal with less pixels than a DSLR, making the photosites larger but who knows what the actual result will be.


Help me if I'm wrong guys....this is my understanding of low light and it's indirect realtionship to aperature. (Also....I agree with Jason that "dynamic range" is actually a more accurate description of what we're ALL looking for. Low light is only a component of that) OK....low light capability is made up of several factors:
1. Sensor/technology/sensitivity - some chips/technology are better at it...what can you say?

2. Sensor SIZE - This is a little tricky, because size ALONE doesn't equal light sensitivity, BUT, the SAME sensor technology on two cameras (all else being equal), one smaller, one larger, the larger chip/camera SHOULD have greater light sensitivity.

3. Lens/aperature - OK...if we take the same camera model, even the same lens....on two different cameras. Open one camera (lens) up to 1.5 the other camera (lens) up to 3.5...less light makes it through the lens....(the windows to our house have shutters, we have them closed by 50% more....less light makes it in to our living room)

4. ISO - to continue from the example in number 3....you COULD make the 3.5 camera (lens) appear to capture as much light by raising the ISO. The risk, is that the image will now have more "grain"....and other artifacts. The new Canon 1d Mark iv, is exceptional in this area. That is to say that it's ISO can be set INSANELY HIGH...and still capture an image. In addition to this, it's acceptable range is MUCH HIGHER. So....if the Scarlet (fixed) has a chip that allows INSANELY high ISO without the NOISE....great! It will still be less capable in low light than the other Scarlet with a more wide open Aperture. But...the lower F-stops means that ....all things being equal, switching lenses on the OTHER Scarlet (interchangeable lenses), with faster lenses (wider open aperture)....it WILL have a LOW LIGHT advantage.

Hey DVXUsers....please correct me where/if I'm wrong. That's my understanding....I could be wrong.

Also....quick question....with the D90, I can't change the shutter speed (in video mode)....how does this impact the image? (I know how frame rate impacts the image, ...no low light implications, just slow mo....) I'm not sure about shutter speed, (as far as video....I know the impact in photography)...


As far as that "Sexiest Woman" video, was that the Megan Fox one? I don't think a lot of people were impressed. At least I wasn't. I wasn't too impressed with Camille's 5D Ralph Lauren videos either though. Someone made a comment that I thought was funny that they thought those two videos seemed like someone posting their "Hey, check out my new 35mm adapter!" videos.

I was referring to the Kate Beckinsdale video.

I saw another posting here where someone saw a film festival or something and said that the difference was NOT subtle. I'm sure that, (to simplify), the LARGER THE SCREEN....the MORE OBVIOUS the difference. I agree. However....I haven't "arrived" at the stage of my career that this is even an option....online has been my primary deploy/dist. So...has ANYONE seen ANYTHING ---ONLINE---- that the Red Camera(s) look 50% better than a DSLR?

I'm NOT saying it's NOT possible....I'm just saying that I haven't seen it. I can see 15% or 10%....I just haven't seen anything ----ONLINE----- that blows me away...(comparatively). Again...I'm NOT saying it isn't out there....I'm actually asking to SEE IT. Again....I WANT to be tempted. I WANT to be digging out my check book this time next year....so I appreciate anyone's help on this.

ps...you guys rock!

greymog
12-04-2009, 10:59 AM
I cant confirm but over on scarlet user they are saying it has the tripod mounts on the bottom


the fixed scarlet is smaller than a canon hfs10 ? or similiar size if so no thanks .. i like the idea of having the red one size just cheaper

The idea of a "glove" or another organic way of controlling the cam is crazy and I love it would be awesome to see the director ..

standing there waving his arms like a conductor of a symphony because in many ways he is ..
:grin::grin:

hey christian, this has been an idea i've been toying with for a while now, and that's gesturally controlling a capture device. Wearing it is quite far fetched, but control i think is really possible. text me if you wanna read some notes.

You would like the RED one's size? I think its biggest plus is its small size. I like small, its good for beirut.

Cheers

T

killacam
12-04-2009, 01:39 PM
Help me if I'm wrong guys....this is my understanding of low light and it's indirect realtionship to aperature. (Also....I agree with Jason that "dynamic range" is actually a more accurate description of what we're ALL looking for. Low light is only a component of that) OK....low light capability is made up of several factors:
1. Sensor/technology/sensitivity - some chips/technology are better at it...what can you say?

2. Sensor SIZE - This is a little tricky, because size ALONE doesn't equal light sensitivity, BUT, the SAME sensor technology on two cameras (all else being equal), one smaller, one larger, the larger chip/camera SHOULD have greater light sensitivity.

3. Lens/aperature - OK...if we take the same camera model, even the same lens....on two different cameras. Open one camera (lens) up to 1.5 the other camera (lens) up to 3.5...less light makes it through the lens....(the windows to our house have shutters, we have them closed by 50% more....less light makes it in to our living room)

4. ISO - to continue from the example in number 3....you COULD make the 3.5 camera (lens) appear to capture as much light by raising the ISO. The risk, is that the image will now have more "grain"....and other artifacts. The new Canon 1d Mark iv, is exceptional in this area. That is to say that it's ISO can be set INSANELY HIGH...and still capture an image. In addition to this, it's acceptable range is MUCH HIGHER. So....if the Scarlet (fixed) has a chip that allows INSANELY high ISO without the NOISE....great! It will still be less capable in low light than the other Scarlet with a more wide open Aperture. But...the lower F-stops means that ....all things being equal, switching lenses on the OTHER Scarlet (interchangeable lenses), with faster lenses (wider open aperture)....it WILL have a LOW LIGHT advantage.

Hey DVXUsers....please correct me where/if I'm wrong. That's my understanding....I could be wrong.


I'm not any kind of expert, but from what I understand sensor size helps low light sensitivity mainly because it allows for the photosites (or pixels) to be bigger. However if you cram more pixels onto a sensor you have to make them smaller and sacrifice low light for resolution. The Scarlet has 4.9 megapixels on its 2/3" sensor while most of the DSLRs have around 20 (most of which don't get used for video). Now the DSLRs will likely still have better low light sensitivity but I'm pretty sure the 2.5 stops reference is only an estimate for what the aperture setting would have to be on both cameras to achieve similar DOF. It does not actually mean there is a 2.5 stop difference in terms of sensitivity.

As far as ISO, Red's Jim Jannard said that 800 is the new ISO 320, which means that he believes there is now the same amount of noise at 800 on the new sensor as there was at 320 on the Red One. This might be referring to the sensor on the S35 and above though I don't know.

And if dynamic range is what we're all looking for, unfortunately traditional cameras still have most of the DSLRs beat.

David G. Smith
12-04-2009, 01:55 PM
But it is everyday he gets to work with the Scarlet and Epic prototypes....
(hence my questioning of the past tense)

:)

OK.... I can see that.... wow, we need to get out more!!! :shocked:

killacam
12-04-2009, 02:01 PM
haha working with camera prototypes does seem a little dry compared to filming celebrities running around in their underwear.

Nektonic
12-06-2009, 08:51 AM
I have to say, I'm still very interested in the 2/3 Scarlet, even after all this delay.

I expected it to be bigger, but I like the size. I'm often a one-man band type of shooter, or if I have a crew, I don't have a big one. I want a good camera that is not a pain in the arse to transport and setup, especially if I'm by myself. Still surprised to see it sitting next to that Nikon D3.

My biggest concern is low light and DOF on the 2/3 fixed lens version, but overall it looks and sounds (spec-wise) very good.

I think my original plan still stands. First get one of the two versions of the 2/3 Scarlets, then use it for a year or two and upgrade to the S35 or better Scarlet brain plus accessories. Of course, its still a while before anybody gets their hands on any of the Scarlets or Epics, so I guess I'll just have to be patient.


I just came back from an Indie film festival and the difference between the DSLR flims and the Red films was not subtle. Let's ignore moire, Jason put his finger on the thing that was most obvious. The DSLR films suffered whenever the lighting was less than optimal, shadow etc., but with the Red films there was much less color breakup and much cleaner images throughout the range. I found myself wondering if a clean image was really much more important than shallow DOF. To my eye the answer is yes. I think that the eye is drawn naturally to distortion so get rid of that before you can optimize the image.

After viewing both DSLR and Red films in the same night, I now wonder if those of us on the lower end of the DSLR bandwagon might end up changing ships to favor clean images over shallow DOF. With our budget, and today's technology, we can have one or the other, but not both.

This is definitely something I've been thinking about. Granted, I still think the DSLR's (Canon's and Panasonic's in particular) offer great results for what they are, basically photo cameras with a generous HD video mode thrown in.

But at the same time, when if comes down to it, I think many might want to deal with 2/3 + exceptional image quality/120 fps over 35mm DOF. And like I mentioned above, for those that can't jump on an S35 Scarlet right away, they can always opt for the 2/3 one and then upgrade a year or two later to one of the higher end models. I look at as, we've waited for 35mm DOF for so long, another year isn't going to kill most of us... save for those doing a feature film, then I could see wanting to stretch the funds to get an S35 Scarlet.

philiplipetz
12-06-2009, 09:07 AM
I think my original plan still stands. First get one of the two versions of the 2/3 Scarlets, then use it for a year or two and upgrade to the S35 or better Scarlet brain plus accessories.

A lot of people are pointing out that the fixed Red Scarlet package has approx. $3K in required accessories that can be taken off the fixed Scarlet and transfered to higher level cams. So that is becoming an upgrade path.

Of course, the accessories are all the basic version of tools that can be purchased in more complex versions. Still, it is an interesting idea, so that you only lose a small amount on an upgrade, and can eventually have a module for a b-cam when you upgrade further and have extra accessories.

Nektonic
12-06-2009, 09:16 AM
A lot of people are pointing out that the fixed Red Scarlet package has approx. $3K in required accessories that can be taken off the fixed Scarlet and transfered to higher level cams. So that is becoming an upgrade path.

Not bad. I didn't think of that aspect.

And you're right, some of the included gear with the 2/3 fixed are the more basic ones, but as long as it does what I need, I'm satisfied.

I do have to add one caveat... the rumored Canon EOS mount APS-C video camera that is supposed to be announced next year. It was rumored that it will be priced at around $7,000. The recent price increase on the Scarlet 2/3 fixed has brought it a bit close to the possible Canon competitor. I would assume that Canon would have to iron out some of the issues with the video modes on their DSLR's with a dedicated video camera. Of course, it is still gonna be limited to 1080p and with a lesser quality codec, even if it is a much better one than the current crop of DSLR's use. And then probably no 120 fps modes, so the Scarlet should still stand out pretty well if Canon does release something to compete with it.

SLoNiCK
12-06-2009, 11:35 PM
I do have to add one caveat... the rumored Canon EOS mount APS-C video camera that is supposed to be announced next year. It was rumored that it will be priced at around $7,000.

Too many speculations and personal hopes are involved in these rumors, IMHO. What lens system will it have? Current EF, EF-s lenses are not designed for proper operation in video mode. Can anyone bet Canon won't try to release new lens system (with shorter flange distance, for example) limited in compatibility with current one to gather more coins in their pocket? Then, why 7K$, not (let's say) 17K$? Cause it will replace H1x cams on market? But it can easily be a new step in price ladder. Canon don't have high-end cams - nice opportunity to start having.

At least, after all changes and shifts, Scarlet currently looks a little bit more real and affordable (fixed one) than any hypothetical concurrent device from other brands. Save money for it and even in worst case scenario you'll be 5K closer to any other cam you'll be able to buy at that moment.

yoclay
12-07-2009, 12:53 AM
A lot of people over at Scarletuser are saying they don't expect the FF to come to market, because of it's closeness to the Epic. The S35 fully configured is going to be much more expensive than $7000 (try $12-15,000). If you are doing broadcast or need quick workflow turnaround Canon may still be the way to go. Unfortunately.

stip
12-07-2009, 07:26 AM
I bet in 2010 Sony DSLR's will be the way to go :)

Jason Ramsey
12-07-2009, 09:59 AM
A lot of people over at Scarletuser are saying they don't expect the FF to come to market, because of it's closeness to the Epic. .

A lot of people speculate without any information, and then that speculation turns to rumors, and then people are running around saying they heard xyz...

:)

snowleopard
12-07-2009, 03:18 PM
Like Chris noted pages ago, I'm really burnt out on all the endless hype, followed by endless changes and delays from Red. Someone wake me when I can actually see some working footage from a camera I can actually purchase and have within a week or so - you know, like products from every other company.

As to the Canons, we can't easily comment on anything unmade, let alone unannounced. Like Scarlet, until it's actually released, it's still vapor, no matter how many specs or speculations one wants to espouse.

I will say this though, the fact that so many people are using the EOS Mark II (and soon to be Mark IV) and 7D, and getting fantastic looking footage out of them, even with their shortcomings, says a great deal right there about what we're willing to accept, and maybe expect - leaving Canon a great deal of leeway, depending on what they want to manufacture. It does make sense to me though to make a big machine with guts similar to the Mark IV essentially replacing the XH-H1, and a smaller/fixed machine with guts similar to the 7D replacing the A1. One would think those would sell like hotcakes. But who knows what they are thinking or planning?

Pietro Impagliazzo
12-07-2009, 04:15 PM
I wonder why RED's approach pisses so many people off.

Just enjoy the announcements and buy them when they hit the market if something appeals to you.

Max Smith
12-07-2009, 10:58 PM
Because it's like some hot chick telling you she's going to give you the best night of passionate, naughty sex you'll ever have in your life six months from now. And during that six months, she keeps giving you hotter and hotter details of what she's going to do to you and what she's going to let you do to her. Maybe she even starts talking about inviting her friend, the nymphomaniac who used to be a model but had to quit because she was just too beautiful. And then when the date starts to get close and you can hardly button your pants anymore, she calls and says it's going to be another six months.

And then everybody says "What's the big deal, you can totally bang that girl with the unibrow and mullet during the next six months and figure out in six months whether you'll even want to bang the hot chick and her nympho friend."

:grin:

Denwa
12-08-2009, 01:11 AM
I'd just bang the nympho. Oh wait, I did. I bought an HMC150. lol

I'll believe the release date when I see people with the camera in there hands in the real world. :)

SLoNiCK
12-08-2009, 01:22 AM
I wonder why RED's approach pisses so many people off.

Watching the rich boy plays expensive toy you can't afford for too long.

philiplipetz
12-08-2009, 10:33 PM
I do have to add one caveat... the rumored Canon EOS mount APS-C video camera that is supposed to be announced next year. It was rumored that it will be priced at around $7,000. The recent price increase on the Scarlet 2/3 fixed has brought it a bit close to the possible Canon competitor. I would assume that Canon would have to iron out some of the issues with the video modes on their DSLR's with a dedicated video camera. Of course, it is still gonna be limited to 1080p and with a lesser quality codec, even if it is a much better one than the current crop of DSLR's use. And then probably no 120 fps modes, so the Scarlet should still stand out pretty well if Canon does release something to compete with it.

The main problem of DSLRs, aliasing is easily solved once you optimize the bandpass filter to video rather than still resolution. Going for the Canon might be more traditional, and more portable ,form factor. However, will it also have RAW, optimal codec, cinema accessories, and compatibility with industry standard cams? No. Also consider the difference in between EOS still lenses and Red lenses, especially how they work with the advanced focusing functions found in Scarlet. Not comparable systems to my eye. But then I have held neither cam in my hands so all is speculation on limited information.

Pietro Impagliazzo
12-09-2009, 05:19 AM
Because it's like some hot chick telling you she's going to give you the best night of passionate, naughty sex you'll ever have in your life six months from now. And during that six months, she keeps giving you hotter and hotter details of what she's going to do to you and what she's going to let you do to her. Maybe she even starts talking about inviting her friend, the nymphomaniac who used to be a model but had to quit because she was just too beautiful. And then when the date starts to get close and you can hardly button your pants anymore, she calls and says it's going to be another six months.

And then everybody says "What's the big deal, you can totally bang that girl with the unibrow and mullet during the next six months and figure out in six months whether you'll even want to bang the hot chick and her nympho friend."

I've totally been there mate, and yeah, I was pretty pissed.

LOL

However, well... RED appeals to other fronts for me.

:happy:

ethan cooper
12-09-2009, 08:11 AM
Because it's like some hot chick telling you she's going to give you the best night of passionate, naughty sex you'll ever have in your life six months from now. And during that six months, she keeps giving you hotter and hotter details of what she's going to do to you and what she's going to let you do to her. Maybe she even starts talking about inviting her friend, the nymphomaniac who used to be a model but had to quit because she was just too beautiful. And then when the date starts to get close and you can hardly button your pants anymore, she calls and says it's going to be another six months.

And then everybody says "What's the big deal, you can totally bang that girl with the unibrow and mullet during the next six months and figure out in six months whether you'll even want to bang the hot chick and her nympho friend."

That was seriously funny, and a decent analogy as well.

Isaac_Brody
12-09-2009, 09:47 AM
Because it's like some hot chick telling you she's going to give you the best night of passionate, naughty sex you'll ever have in your life six months from now. And during that six months, she keeps giving you hotter and hotter details of what she's going to do to you and what she's going to let you do to her. Maybe she even starts talking about inviting her friend, the nymphomaniac who used to be a model but had to quit because she was just too beautiful. And then when the date starts to get close and you can hardly button your pants anymore, she calls and says it's going to be another six months.

And then everybody says "What's the big deal, you can totally bang that girl with the unibrow and mullet during the next six months and figure out in six months whether you'll even want to bang the hot chick and her nympho friend."


Hahaha. Hands down the best scarlet analogy I've heard so far. :beer:

Zacatac
12-09-2009, 09:48 AM
Because it's like some hot chick telling you she's going to give you the best night of passionate, naughty sex you'll ever have in your life six months from now. And during that six months, she keeps giving you hotter and hotter details of what she's going to do to you and what she's going to let you do to her. Maybe she even starts talking about inviting her friend, the nymphomaniac who used to be a model but had to quit because she was just too beautiful. And then when the date starts to get close and you can hardly button your pants anymore, she calls and says it's going to be another six months.

And then everybody says "What's the big deal, you can totally bang that girl with the unibrow and mullet during the next six months and figure out in six months whether you'll even want to bang the hot chick and her nympho friend."


Have.... you been reading my Diary?!

eril2006
12-27-2009, 12:25 PM
DSLR's showed up, and Red lost most prosumer market due to their delays, and from now on they are going for the pro.'s. Added features, added delays to add more features, added prices show that.

A professional would go with a Red, or film, but DSLR format is catching up with higher end looks. They also offer -much- better prices for the prosumers like me. We were buying $5K prosumer cameras (and $1500 DOF adapters), but now, it's either a $2K Canon 5D (Ebay), or a $15K Red. Easy pick. Since many (like myself) were already into photography, we already had the lenses we can use on both worlds, photos/videos.

I bet DSLR's will eventually wipe out lower end Red models as well. Red will go sit on the market without the revolutionary change they aimed to claim. They will be good, but very expensive. It's been done.

The future will be:
1. The small/light, easy to place/move on the set, high quality DSLR's.
2. Made for pro.'s, expensive, but great if you have a crew/big budget digital cameras.

#2 was around, but #1 is a great new choice, especially for the early career years.

Actually, many of the most rated/liked/commented videos on the web were shot on DSLR's of $1K-$3K. More than the camera, it's the story, and how much people can relate to it makes the change. If you are good, the bigger equipment will come.

I shot this with a $950 Nikon D90. The budget was $1000, and half of that was the music royalty fees. It's my 1st short movie. Not the best, but DSLR's made it possible. I am the only crew, so even a Canon XH-A1 (2nd camera I had at the time) would be too much to handle for me. I couldn't use it.

I think me, and the DSLR's grow in time, and I will keep using them.
http://www.vimeo.com/7634185

Regards,
Eril.

alwayswithchillis
02-13-2010, 11:51 AM
Hello Eril,

Totally new to the forum so forgive any faux pas I might make.

Just wondering about your view on the totally configurable cameras out there like the Elphel 353? Uncompressed video and superb 10 and 12 bit output.

Regaards,

J

landogarner
02-19-2010, 01:25 PM
DSLR's showed up, and Red lost most prosumer market due to their delays, and from now on they are going for the pro.'s. Added features, added delays to add more features, added prices show that.

A professional would go with a Red, or film, but DSLR format is catching up with higher end looks. They also offer -much- better prices for the prosumers like me. We were buying $5K prosumer cameras (and $1500 DOF adapters), but now, it's either a $2K Canon 5D (Ebay), or a $15K Red. Easy pick. Since many (like myself) were already into photography, we already had the lenses we can use on both worlds, photos/videos.

I bet DSLR's will eventually wipe out lower end Red models as well. Red will go sit on the market without the revolutionary change they aimed to claim. They will be good, but very expensive. It's been done.

The future will be:
1. The small/light, easy to place/move on the set, high quality DSLR's.
2. Made for pro.'s, expensive, but great if you have a crew/big budget digital cameras.

#2 was around, but #1 is a great new choice, especially for the early career years.

Actually, many of the most rated/liked/commented videos on the web were shot on DSLR's of $1K-$3K. More than the camera, it's the story, and how much people can relate to it makes the change. If you are good, the bigger equipment will come.

I shot this with a $950 Nikon D90. The budget was $1000, and half of that was the music royalty fees. It's my 1st short movie. Not the best, but DSLR's made it possible. I am the only crew, so even a Canon XH-A1 (2nd camera I had at the time) would be too much to handle for me. I couldn't use it.

I think me, and the DSLR's grow in time, and I will keep using them.
http://www.vimeo.com/7634185

Regards,
Eril.


You forget the main reason I, and a lot of people, will be buying Scarlet systems. They are modular.... It promises massive long term savings. The module that houses the sensor is completely seperate and upgradeable. This opens up the possibility to affordably upgrade your sensor every couple years, not having to buy and learn a new camera system every time the new flavor of the month comes out, owning mulitple sensor modules and interchanging them like lenses etc.

I think you seriously underestimate the impact this modular system is going to have on the market.

mcgeedigital
02-19-2010, 02:08 PM
You forget the main reason I, and a lot of people, will be buying Scarlet systems. They are modular.... It promises massive long term savings. The module that houses the sensor is completely seperate and upgradeable. This opens up the possibility to affordably upgrade your sensor every couple years, not having to buy and learn a new camera system every time the new flavor of the month comes out, owning mulitple sensor modules and interchanging them like lenses etc.

I think you seriously underestimate the impact this modular system is going to have on the market.


When the promising stops and the delivery happens, then I will pay attention.

Until then, meh.

Otis Grapsas
02-19-2010, 03:11 PM
Modularity is important. But when modularity is provided by components besigned by and available from a single vendor, and the product is operating in a small market, the cost is increased a lot. It's nothing like the modularity an open market video card provides vs one soldered on the motherboard. There is increased design/manufacturing cost and increased logistics/support/service cost and the monopoly situation will not help. The upgrade could easily cost the same with a new system.

If Sony decided to offer the sensor or processing board of their 4000 euro camcorders in a module, the camera would probably cost 6000 and the upgrade would be 2000. And that's very conservative if you check the price of common accessories. You might as well buy the new model and give away the old one. A camcorder upgrade does not cost very much in any case. Camcorders keep a large part of their value even after 2 years. The cost of ownership per month is ridiculously low, even for expensive ones. It's the mass marketing of non modular products that achieves this.

In the Scarlet case, I believe the modularity mostly serves to offer an upgrade path to the more expensive systems. It makes the cost easier to swallow by distributing it in time, as one's needs change. And it makes it easier for Red to put someone into their product line. That's the purpose of an entry level system and most companies have entry levels systems designed exactly for that. Sometimes they are even losing money on those, but they serve as marketing for the rest of the line. A 300 euro Nikon D40 kit cannot possibly produce profit considering its parts. But it could get you into high end models with higher profit and into buying lenses and other accessories.

landogarner
02-19-2010, 03:15 PM
When the promising stops and the delivery happens, then I will pay attention.

Until then, meh.

I knew someone would bite on that wording :cool:

Barry_Green
02-19-2010, 03:17 PM
They are modular.... It promises massive long term savings. The module that houses the sensor is completely seperate and upgradeable. This opens up the possibility to affordably upgrade your sensor every couple years, not having to buy and learn a new camera system every time the new flavor of the month comes out, owning mulitple sensor modules and interchanging them like lenses etc.

I think you seriously underestimate the impact this modular system is going to have on the market.
Yeah, but -- while that sounds nice on paper, how will it work in reality?

Look at the Red One: OBSOLESCENCE OBSOLETE, they said. Now, two years later, the Red One itself is being discontinued, totally replaced by the Epic. They've announced that the Red One is end-of-line. It was supposed to be the last camera anyone would ever need, yet it didn't even last past two years before being totally supplanted.

How has modularity worked out in other industries? Look at computers -- I was way sold on the Lenovo line because I got the dock, the interchangeable bay battery and hard drive system, etc. So when looking to upgrade, I of course look to Lenovo to see what the newest is, so I can re-use all my gear. And the W510 is looking quite tasty -- but guess what? It needs a new dock. It draws more power and can't be used with my current dock. So there's a $350 accessory that gets thrown out the window. And, oh yeah, the bay battery won't work either. New quad-core chips, different power requirements, whatever, doesn't matter, my bay battery won't work on the new system.

I'm sure we have many folks here who can testify to buying into a "modular" concept, only to find out that the original design wasn't as forward-thinking or didn't provide as much capability as originally thought.

In an industry where the Scarlet has (to many people) become obsolete before it's even been released, and Noktor goes from announcing their product to being called a vaporware scam IN JUST FOUR DAYS, just how much longevity will there be to this particular modular design? (Lots, I hope, as I plan on buying it...) but realistically -- has this concept worked anywhere else before? Anyone have any examples? It's an idea that's been talked about a lot, in a lot of industries; heck, look at power tools, manufacturers standardized around one particular type of battery (and yes, I bought a Leaf Hog and an Edge Hog and the tree-trimming-chainsaw-hog thing, all because they use the same battery) but I don't really expect that five years from now Black & Decker will be offering the same batteries, for whatever reason. Maybe what you had was 12v, and all the new batteries are 14v, or 18v, or smaller, or they've replaced Li-Ion with lead-acid or the other way around, or whatever.

But to expect that really, this time, this modular system will be the end-all-and-be-all? I hope to be wrong, because I'm gonna spend a lot on it, but frankly I am not counting on it lasting beyond the one initial design and purchase. If it does, great -- all the better. But in general, life just doesn't work that way.

dust'n the callipygous
02-19-2010, 05:16 PM
continuing with what barry said as far as making obsolescence obsolete, wouldn't everything about the product have to become the standard? and then it would only be until a new standard is released. USB is a great port for a computer--nearly everything uses it, but it'll eventually be replaced with something better and faster. RED is a company, just like any other, that is constantly searching for ways to improve upon itself, which is probably the reason for all of the delays. A new feature creates another new feature, which creates another new feature, etc. At some point, you've just got to stop and go with it. Keep that development going for the next model (there will be more models). It's great that they have this interchangeable and upgradeable system, so you can swap out the internals, but what happens if they come up with external improvements--a better system for latching modules together, better heat management, or just better ergonomics?

all that said, it will probably be all the camera i'll need for quite some time.

Homunculus
03-04-2010, 08:43 PM
are you guys referring to usb 3.0, how fast is that supposed to be exactly?

snowleopard
03-05-2010, 01:20 AM
....Also consider the difference in between EOS still lenses and Red lenses, especially how they work with the advanced focusing functions found in Scarlet.
Only one problem - Scarlet doesn't exist. And by the time it actually does...

stip
03-05-2010, 09:05 AM
are you guys referring to usb 3.0, how fast is that supposed to be exactly?

theroretically it's 5 GBit/s, but even 2.0 never reached it's theoretical performance.
It's said to be 5 times faster than 2.0, somewhere between 2 and 3 Gbit/s but that'll depend on other hardware factors as well

AllAroundFilmLV
03-08-2010, 03:10 AM
In an industry where the Scarlet has (to many people) become obsolete before it's even been released, and Noktor goes from announcing their product to being called a vaporware scam IN JUST FOUR DAYS, just how much longevity will there be to this particular modular design? (Lots, I hope, as I plan on buying it...) but realistically -- has this concept worked anywhere else before? Anyone have any examples? It's an idea that's been talked about a lot, in a lot of industries; heck, look at power tools, manufacturers standardized around one particular type of battery (and yes, I bought a Leaf Hog and an Edge Hog and the tree-trimming-chainsaw-hog thing, all because they use the same battery) but I don't really expect that five years from now Black & Decker will be offering the same batteries, for whatever reason. Maybe what you had was 12v, and all the new batteries are 14v, or 18v, or smaller, or they've replaced Li-Ion with lead-acid or the other way around, or whatever.

Dammit this guy's good. Very good points Mr. Green. Very good points indeed.

ugafan
03-09-2010, 07:58 AM
remember me?
http://gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2008/04/redscarlet.jpg

Zacatac
03-09-2010, 08:14 AM
remember me?
http://gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2008/04/redscarlet.jpg


Poor guy.. but when you think about it... all that has been changed is the back of it, and the features, and the lens actually has rings on it

ugafan
03-09-2010, 09:13 AM
unfortunately for the scarlet, the game has changed since it was first announced.

think about it, a couple of years ago you would have thought i was crazy if i told you that you could have a camera that shoots 1080p at 24 fps with interchangeable lenses and takes 18mp stills for a mere $899. now it's a reality and just the beginning of what's to come.

although the scarlet is a great deal relative to what more expensive cameras go for, the cost will put it out of the reach for most of the little guys and people just starting out. i don't think the people at red realized how quickly the market would evolve and now find themselves with a camera that seems somewhat out of place.
i'm still excited to see what they come up with, but it doesn't look like it will have the impact we once thought it would.

Ian-T
03-09-2010, 09:21 AM
I agree ugafan.

Zacatac
03-09-2010, 10:19 AM
But when you consider the fact that the 1080 24p camera that shoots 18megapixels, published to a H.264 compressed codec, and has audio capabilites of null, Scarlet still will have the advantage

Butcher
03-09-2010, 10:35 AM
But not at the same pricepoint.

The price of Scarlet has slowly crept upwards, and when you start adding in the ProAudio I/O, extra batteries, handles and grips, and all the other bells and whistles to really make ready for a longer shoot you're probably looking at $8 - $10K and upwards. That puts it in a totally different ballpark than the current crop of DSLRs.

It will be interesting to see how Scarlet plays once it's actually available, because if it's sold en masse like Red expect it had better be bulletproof. Red was released as a camera in beta but people understood that going in. Scarlet won't have that luxury.

snowleopard
03-09-2010, 10:36 AM
Except these 1080p cameras are out, Scarlet isn't, and who knows when it will be? Obviously the company can't be trusted with their proposed release dates, so even if it comes out, say, at the end of 2010, we don't know what else Canon/Panasonic/Sony/JVC will release around that time. We also don't know just how well Scarlet will truly preform or what the specs will truly be. Will there be zero glitches, and the camera perfectly perform everything promised? Until they actually, finally, deliver, it's impossible to actually compare. Or, if Canon/Sony/Panny/JVC decided to tell us what they plan on releasing in about a year or so in the $5.000+ range we could compare Scarlet to that.

The other issue is that despite all the hair splitting by people like us, most people think the QT h.264 codec on the Canons looks fine, and can be pushed enough in post (remember Philip Bloom's trip to Skywalker Ranch and what Lucas and QT thought?) and there have been plenty of workarounds with the audio.

JayGannon
05-21-2010, 06:08 AM
Yeah, but -- while that sounds nice on paper, how will it work in reality?

Look at the Red One: OBSOLESCENCE OBSOLETE, they said. Now, two years later, the Red One itself is being discontinued, totally replaced by the Epic. They've announced that the Red One is end-of-line. It was supposed to be the last camera anyone would ever need, yet it didn't even last past two years before being totally supplanted.



Your drastically misinformed. The RED One has not been EOL'd, quite the opposite.
Your opinion is well respected so you'd do well to check your facts before making statements like that man.

MX turns the Red One into essentially a new camera (If you havent shot on MX don't disagree with me)

And Red have stated that the One is not being discontinued that it will most likely be offered as an MX ready from the factory camera.

It has also been offered as a full price trade in against the Epic, which in essence means your upgrading to a brand new camera without any financial hit.

Very misinformed.

Barry_Green
05-21-2010, 12:09 PM
Your drastically misinformed. The RED One has not been EOL'd, quite the opposite.
Your opinion is well respected so you'd do well to check your facts before making statements like that man.
I am always about checking facts. Jim Jannard himself is the one who said that production of the Red One will be discontinued. Now, I guess it's possible that with "everything subject to change... count on it" that something might have changed, but I'm going off what I read from the leader himself. Has that been changed?


MX turns the Red One into essentially a new camera (If you havent shot on MX don't disagree with me)
Agreed. But they still said they're going to discontinue production of it. They'll support the old ones, but they're not making any more new ones after the Epic ships. Unless, of course, that's changed...


And Red have stated that the One is not being discontinued that it will most likely be offered as an MX ready from the factory camera.
That's different from what they said before. Do you have a link to that statement?


It has also been offered as a full price trade in against the Epic, which in essence means your upgrading to a brand new camera without any financial hit.
Right -- the reason it's being offered as a trade-in, is because it's discontinued. It can't be upgraded any further, so they want to discontinue that line and start over with the Epic.


Very misinformed.
Well, if I'm misinformed, can I at least point you to the post that "misinformed" me?

There will be an end to the RED ONE... production that is. We learned that it wasn't infinitely upgradeable as we had originally thought. That's why we have given all RED ONE owners a chance at full trade in allowance towards the EPIC system.

Having said that, there are many who want to keep as continue to use their R1s. We will support the RED ONE for many years to come. It changed history and deserves proper respect from all of us at RED.

That post was from Jim Jannard on October 16, 2009. You can see the thread here:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=36366

So how was I misinformed? Has that policy been changed in a more recent post?

JayGannon
05-25-2010, 02:51 PM
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=599699&postcount=12


C.A. - logistically, no problem. From a customer loyalty standpoint, we want to make sure early RED ONE adopters get a chance to get the sensor in their cameras first before a new customer could get a new RED ONE with an M-X sensor.

BC

There is also a Monstro upgrade path for the Red One.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=605133&postcount=39

You can trade in an unexecuted RED ONE for a FF35 Monstro Epic (Brain only) for full R1 value. At any rate my point was that the One even if production halts is still upgradable in that MX sensor, and there will possible be more upgrades in the way of tech from Epic going to the One also.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=604347&postcount=45


Yes.. the R1 is modular in terms of media.. and we are working on a few ways to use the SSD's on R1. Of course the pipes in the R1 will not be able to take advantage of the increased speeds that media is capable of, but they can mimic the current R1 options. The new 64GB CF card of course just works in the normal side CF slot everyone has now. Hardly a camera that has been EoL'd which means they are not producing, not supporting and not encouraging people to buy or use in a production setting.

End of Life:


End-of-life (EOL) is a term used with respect to a retailed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retail) product (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_%28business%29), indicating that the product is in the end of its product lifetime and a vendor will no longer be marketing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing), selling, or promoting a particular product and may also be limiting or ending support for the product.

Luis Caffesse
05-25-2010, 03:24 PM
End-of-life (EOL) is a term used with respect to a retailed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retail) product (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_%28business%29), indicating that the product is in the end of its product lifetime and a vendor will no longer be marketing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing), selling, or promoting a particular product and may also be limiting or ending support for the product.

I think the word 'may' is the key here.
As soon as Epic starts shipping, Red One will no longer be sold, according to RED.
It will be supported, as Jannard said... it will even be upgradeable for those who still own them....and it will be able to be traded in for the full value towards an Epic. But RED will no longer be marketing, selling or promoting the RedOne (the three conditions outlined in the definition you quoted).

At least, that has been their stance thus far as most everyone seems to understand it (and as Barry posted above).

Blaine
05-25-2010, 03:26 PM
grrrrr...

Luis, i was about to post the same thing....:angry:

Luis Caffesse
05-25-2010, 03:28 PM
grrrrr...

Luis, i was about to post the same thing....:angry:

Typing was the most useful class I ever took in school
:)

snowleopard
05-25-2010, 04:59 PM
You know, I don’t really have a problem with that. Yes, they said “never obsolete”, but that’s just sales hype. If they are allowing trade-in’s, I say great..

The problem I have area all the unfulfilled promises on gear and release dates, especially after all the hype on Scarlet. It’s just embarrassing at this point.

ChipG
05-25-2010, 06:36 PM
Ouch, that's going to make it even harder to sell all the used red ones from trade INS. I mean that statement would make me not want to buy one for $5k.

Luis Caffesse
05-25-2010, 06:40 PM
Ouch, that's going to make it even harder to sell all the used red ones from trade INS. I mean that statement would make me not want to buy one for $5k.

I don't think they ever had the intention of reselling them.
At least, I've never seen anything to suggest that.

ChipG
05-25-2010, 06:54 PM
I don't think they ever had the intention of reselling them.
At least, I've never seen anything to suggest that.

It would be a shame if they destroid them, think of all the universities and film schools / starving artists that could further their education from them being donated or put to good use, one of the reasons avid's $2500 media composer cost students $250.

All I know now is there will be a warehouse full of used red ones. I hope they have the chance to find good homes.

Luis Caffesse
05-25-2010, 06:58 PM
http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/info_and_tech/assets/raiders_book_warehouse.jpg

snowleopard
05-25-2010, 07:43 PM
LOL Luis!

:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

ChipG
05-26-2010, 02:08 AM
Heh?
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/30752/1274861312.jpg

ChipG
05-26-2010, 02:11 AM
It's the economy man!

Ryan Patrick O'Hara
05-28-2010, 10:23 AM
Nothing will ever last forever. Just look at the film world. A film camera's LOOK is captured by only two things. The film stock and the lens. Those are the only two things in the camera that effect the image. Thus any 35mm camera that could properly pull film through at 24fps is really 'future proof', since you just load a new film stock with a new lens and the image will look like any other camera with the same stock and lens, despite when it was made.


...but it's not future proof. They (arri, panavision) still made camera model after camera model, with tiny little changes. I think it's funny I can shoot an Arriflex 35III from 1979 with a new Vision 3 film stock and Arri Masterprime lens, and it would look identical to an ArriFLEX 235 from 2004 with the same Vision 3 stock and Arri Masterprime lens. In fact, the Arriflex 35III shoots up to 50fps natively or up to 120fps with a speed base! Not shabby, huh? But still, Arriflex made small improvements over time and sold them to the world.

It's product. It's business. Do you ever really think anyone is going to make the 'ever-lasting-gobstopper' camera? No. They loose money. In the end a re-configurable or modular RED system may last much longer then the R1, but expect to constantly be buying new modules to keep up with the joneses because there will always be capitalism and industry competition. I'd expect you'll find even with a modular upgradable camera, you'll simply be spending what you would have for a new camera, but spread out over time by upgrading the one you have.

I'm not saying this is bad. I think it's great. But don't kid yourself that anything will never be obsolete.

youngindiefilms
05-28-2010, 11:53 AM
Nothing will ever last forever. Just look at the film world. A film camera's LOOK is captured by only two things. The film stock and the lens. Those are the only two things in the camera that effect the image. Thus any 35mm camera that could properly pull film through at 24fps is really 'future proof', since you just load a new film stock with a new lens and the image will look like any other camera with the same stock and lens, despite when it was made.


...but it's not future proof. They (arri, panavision) still made camera model after camera model, with tiny little changes. I think it's funny I can shoot an Arriflex 35III from 1979 with a new Vision 3 film stock and Arri Masterprime lens, and it would look identical to an ArriFLEX 235 from 2004 with the same Vision 3 stock and Arri Masterprime lens. In fact, the Arriflex 35III shoots up to 50fps natively or up to 120fps with a speed base! Not shabby, huh? But still, Arriflex made small improvements over time and sold them to the world.

It's product. It's business. Do you ever really think anyone is going to make the 'ever-lasting-gobstopper' camera? No. They loose money. In the end a re-configurable or modular RED system may last much longer then the R1, but expect to constantly be buying new modules to keep up with the joneses because there will always be capitalism and industry competition. I'd expect you'll find even with a modular upgradable camera, you'll simply be spending what you would have for a new camera, but spread out over time by upgrading the one you have.

I'm not saying this is bad. I think it's great. But don't kid yourself that anything will never be obsolete.

Amen to that! Couldn't have said it any better. :2vrolijk_08:

Denwa
05-28-2010, 11:53 AM
"Red Camera. The only Camera you will ever need... till uh.. er.. we release the next ONE."


:D

Stephen Mick
05-28-2010, 11:56 AM
Well, to be fair, the RED ONE could be considered the last camera you'd ever NEED. But judging from the amount of discussion on the boards about cameras, there's always going to be another camera you'll WANT. :D

Gabrobot
05-28-2010, 08:52 PM
Nothing will ever last forever. Just look at the film world. A film camera's LOOK is captured by only two things. The film stock and the lens. Those are the only two things in the camera that effect the image. Thus any 35mm camera that could properly pull film through at 24fps is really 'future proof', since you just load a new film stock with a new lens and the image will look like any other camera with the same stock and lens, despite when it was made.


...but it's not future proof. They (arri, panavision) still made camera model after camera model, with tiny little changes. I think it's funny I can shoot an Arriflex 35III from 1979 with a new Vision 3 film stock and Arri Masterprime lens, and it would look identical to an ArriFLEX 235 from 2004 with the same Vision 3 stock and Arri Masterprime lens. In fact, the Arriflex 35III shoots up to 50fps natively or up to 120fps with a speed base! Not shabby, huh? But still, Arriflex made small improvements over time and sold them to the world.

It's product. It's business. Do you ever really think anyone is going to make the 'ever-lasting-gobstopper' camera? No. They loose money. In the end a re-configurable or modular RED system may last much longer then the R1, but expect to constantly be buying new modules to keep up with the joneses because there will always be capitalism and industry competition. I'd expect you'll find even with a modular upgradable camera, you'll simply be spending what you would have for a new camera, but spread out over time by upgrading the one you have.

I'm not saying this is bad. I think it's great. But don't kid yourself that anything will never be obsolete.

All really good points.

I think the idea though is that what Red is doing is besides the new cameras, they are also letting you upgrade the sensor in their old cameras which is kind of like using new film stock in an old camera like your example.

Barry_Green
05-28-2010, 09:13 PM
I think the idea though is that what Red is doing is besides the new cameras, they are also letting you upgrade the sensor in their old cameras which is kind of like using new film stock in an old camera like your example.
They are indeed, and that's great. Except, to be fair, for the cost of the upgrade you could buy a complete AF100, and still have your old Red One. Or, instead of upgrading the Red's sensor to M-X, you could buy two 5D Mark II's. Or three 7D's. Or six T2i's. And still have the original Red One too.

So there's nothing wrong with modularity. You just have to ask yourself if it makes sense for your particular situation. In an industry where technology is advancing at a furious rate and prices are plummeting just as fast, where even cell phones now have 720p HD video on them, what's the landscape going to look like three years from now?

And it's not like it's a new idea.
http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-16sr-magazine.php

I doubt it'll be all that successful though. People just don't seem to be in the mood to put a lot of money into an old system; not when brand new stuff is so cheap! Would you buy a "digital film magazine" for your old Arri 16SR, for $30,000, and have 16mm DOF? Neither would I.

And neither, apparently, did anyone else when Joe Dunton tried the same thing back in 2002.
http://www.urbanfox.tv/articles/cameras/c19joedunton.htm

I dunno, it just seems like "modularity" is one of those ideas that sounds fantastic on paper, but never really seems to play out. Even Red's own Red One was supposed to be "the end of obsolescense" and yet just a couple of years later they're going to discontinue it and instead go with the Epic/Scarlet. Which, again, makes me wonder what'll be on the market a couple years from now...

ChipG
05-29-2010, 12:57 AM
Well, to be fair, the RED ONE could be considered the last camera you'd ever NEED. But judging from the amount of discussion on the boards about cameras, there's always going to be another camera you'll WANT. :D

The DVX100 is the last cam you'll ever need if your really good at what you do and want to sell stories (for a small indie), not stock footage or client work.

In 3 years it will be SOOOO refreshing to see a movie in SD that has the washed out low dynamic range 'Traffic' look again that's fuzzy.

Crazy how this board was all over the 'film look' then misunderstood it (not everyone) and now wants razor sharp video footage for shorts and movies, I know it's an artistic choice but......

snowleopard
05-30-2010, 07:20 PM
The DVX100 is the last cam you'll ever need if your really good at what you do and want to sell stories (for a small indie), not stock footage or client work.
That's a very good point. Especially for indies, and not insisting on trying to earn a living. This could be argued about just about any camera since the DVX along these lines (HVX200, HMC150, Canon XH-A1, Sony V1, JVC HD100, etc.).

About 25,000 posts ago Barry aptly pointed out that we had already passed the point of "good enough". How right he was.

Terry_Tsurugi
06-10-2010, 02:39 PM
"[...]And suddenly, one day some little fat girl in Ohio is going to be the new Mozart and make a beautiful film with her father's camcorder and for once, the so-called professionalism about movies will be destroyed, forever, and it will really become an art form."

Maybe we're there already?

Barry_Green
06-10-2010, 02:55 PM
We've been there since 2003 when the DVX first hit.

snowleopard
06-10-2010, 03:00 PM
Make that 37,600 posts ago, when Barry probably said it on 2-Pop...

:Drogar-SunGlass(DBG

David G. Smith
06-10-2010, 03:18 PM
......what's the landscape going to look like three years from now?

.... Which, again, makes me wonder what'll be on the market a couple years from now...


I swear... it really blows my mind sometimes just thinking about it. It an exciting time.

Denwa
06-10-2010, 03:21 PM
I swear... it really blows my mind sometimes just thinking about it. It an exciting time.

... While at the same time making me wonder how fast equipment bought now will depreciate in value by then.

Postmaster
06-10-2010, 03:49 PM
Its a merry-go-round.

In the moment Im drooling for a FF35 Scarlet.

Looks like it has got all the bells and whistles I ever wanted.

Than, maybe next year, maybe in 5 years there comes Quantum Film (http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2010/03/22/quantum-film-threatens-to-replace-cmosccd-image-sensors/) which blows any MysteriumX sensor and even film out of the water, with higher resolution (who needs more than 4k anyway) but x-times the speed and stops than every senor on earth.

And than I will be drooling for that and hoping that I have a chance to upgrade my Scarlet with that.

I guess the drooling for the next bet thing never ends - heck I should go out and shoot something with what I got.

Frank

David G. Smith
06-10-2010, 04:47 PM
... While at the same time making me wonder how fast equipment bought now will depreciate in value by then.

Well, video production equipment is not art, or collectibles, yet. Just because something new comes along doesn't mean that what you got will stop working. However, you do have a point. Making purchasing decisions for video production gear is tricky, and has been for a while. I remember in late '94, early '95 a friend of mine, and frequent collaborator, dropped about $8gs on a super tricked out Hi-8mm analog video camera. It had the full nine yards, interchangeable lenses, pro-shoulder mount form factor, XLR inputs, mechanical filter wheel, ect. Then just a few short months latter the VX1000, et al, dropped and blew his sh*t out of the water. That happens. Of course, there was no DVXUSER back then, where he could have had a resource to check and see what is just over the horizon.

snowleopard
06-10-2010, 05:12 PM
Than, maybe next year, maybe in 5 years there comes Quantum Film (http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2010/03/22/quantum-film-threatens-to-replace-cmosccd-image-sensors/) which blows any MysteriumX sensor and even film out of the water...

Cool link. Anyone know what happened with single pixel sensor cameras (http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20060903014301data_trunc_sys.shtml)?

Zissou
06-11-2010, 09:54 AM
shes single again?


...oh wait, THAT scarlet.... no surprise that ones standing everyone up.

snowleopard
06-11-2010, 01:06 PM
Sorry boys, you can look, but no touch.

http://obama08cubs.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/scarlett_johanson2.jpg

David G. Smith
06-11-2010, 02:38 PM
Cool link. Anyone know what happened with single pixel sensor cameras (http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20060903014301data_trunc_sys.shtml)?

Here are some links about it.

http://dsp.rice.edu/cscamera

http://www.ece.rice.edu/~duarte/camera_news.html

ChipG
06-11-2010, 02:53 PM
What's the latest on Scarlet? I thought they were supposed to have an announcement about it at the end of May???

Barry_Green
06-11-2010, 03:48 PM
Well, they said Mid-May, last I heard. But I think that announcement about the impending announcement was made before Jim went on a health-related monthlong sabbatical, so perhaps that delayed it?

snowleopard
06-11-2010, 08:04 PM
If I were to guess, I'd say maybe end of the year release for Scarlet. Though 2011 is possible. Late summer/fall is likely very optimistic. If I were planning on shooting with it, I wouldn't. Or start thinking about your big project for next summer (June 2011).

It will be released first to Red One users (for a month or..?), and possibly trickle out on pre-order, though they have said no to pre-orders this in the past. They are now taking pre-orders for Epic, though Epic has no release date, and this pre-order is only for users to replace their Red Ones.

Scarlet is currently behind the Epic in all release dates, and design, though development is concurrent. The good news about this is that as the kinks are worked out in Epic, Scarlet may reap some rewards from that.

To Red's credit any footage they have shown from Epic, and Scarlet, has been superb. I've been very critical of their hype machine and shifting dates, even on this very thread, but by all counts when they finally get Scarlet out, it will be a very nice camera. But who knows at what price comparison? By that, I mean cameras released next year by the competition now in development, though not yet announced. Its possible that Panny/Canon/Sony/JVC have cameras now in research or testing that will match, or top Scarlet when released. Who knows?

Link on ScarletUser (http://scarletuser.com/showthread.php?t=4367).

Link on RedUser (http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=45431).

Ralph Oshiro
06-12-2010, 06:55 AM
In the moment Im drooling for a FF35 Scarlet.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there was never a full-frame (24mm x 36mm) Scarlet ever announced, was there? I thought only an S35 (18mm x 24mm) Scarlet was ever mentioned.